We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Trellix Intrusion Prevention System based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Cisco IOS Security is very robust and works very well."
"The solution effectively integrates with Umbrella."
"The technical support is good."
"The Intrusion Firewall is a valuable feature."
"The product has valuable features for business intelligence."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is its flexibility and it performs great."
"We are able to filter a lot of traffic especially when a lot of the traffic is in layer 7."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco IOS Security is posturing."
"McAfee NSP is much more stable than Cisco."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is a good product for dealing with DDoS attacks and for the inspection of network traffic."
"The threat intelligence updates are very accurate."
"The feature I found most valuable is the network threat analyzer in the security platform. It also integrates with GTI, or Global Threat Intelligence. Otherwise, I just use the basic features."
"The product is worth the investment."
"Great monitoring feature."
"Overall the solution is very good. It offers great protection and gives us a good overview of what is on the network."
"The solution can scale."
"There could be a bit more functions on offer that could make it easier to use."
"While Cisco IOS Security is stable and scalable, I would like to see it improved to be even better."
"I think setup could be one area for improvement, because sometimes we don't have people inside so we have to move to the place."
"It would be ideal if the solution had more capacity."
"We faced significant challenges related to licensing issues, particularly when licenses expire."
"I would like upgrading iOS to be a bit easier."
"Cisco IOS Security should improve its functionalities."
"Cisco IOS Security could improve by having more compatibility with other Cisco solutions."
"The technical support must be improved."
"The platform’s GUI could be the latest."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Some of the documentation is not as straightforward as it could be."
"The management component could be simplified."
"The solution could improve some aspects of detection."
"There are limited resources for configuration guidance."
"The management console needs to be less complex and easier to navigate."
More Trellix Intrusion Prevention System Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 10th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 47 reviews while Trellix Intrusion Prevention System is ranked 15th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 14 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Trellix Intrusion Prevention System is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Intrusion Prevention System writes "Protects from attacks in real-time and provides accurate threat intelligence updates". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS and Netgate pfSense, whereas Trellix Intrusion Prevention System is most compared with Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Cisco NGIPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point IPS and Trend Micro Deep Discovery. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. Trellix Intrusion Prevention System report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
