We performed a comparison between Cisco NGIPS and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention 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."The tracking intelligence feature is very good. This solution provides us with the opportunity to detect threats in real-time."
"The most valuable feature would be the IPS is very important in Cisco Firepower because I can configure deep configuration in IPS and tuning."
"It has aligned the features in accordance to our strategic needs"
"The top features of Cisco NGIPS, which have been working very well, include stateful inspection and the access list-based security configuration. But from my perspective, the best part of Cisco NGIPS is the licensing process, which is very easy and straightforward. It's essentially copy-paste licensing."
"It is salable and technically sound."
"Among all the different solutions I have worked with, such as Palo Alto many other firewalls. Cisco has the support, documentation, and design. The documentation is widely available and it can help you a lot with implementation. It makes the implementation much easier."
"IPS is a valuable function, because they update the signatures all the time and it's very granular."
"The cost is the most valuable feature."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"The user interface is a bit more professional than some free products."
"With the IP address flag, I was able to see that I was being hacked. The moment there was an interaction between somebody on my network and that IP, the solution was able to flag it, and we were able to protect ourselves."
"The application control and vulnerability protection are the most valuable features."
"We are currently using the URL filtering feature, which is the most popular."
"You can scale the product."
"I would like to see a more user-friendly interface."
"Some Next-Generation Firewall solutions come with Intrusion Prevention. It would be nice if Cisco NGIPS included that."
"The stability needs improvement so is rated a four out of ten."
"While the Management GUI and FMC could be improved, the devices themselves function well."
"The file trajectory, the trace in contamination files, could be improved."
"I think that some initiation scripts might be helpful because they would make the configuration easier and more user-friendly for customers."
"I would like to see integration with monitoring tools such as Nagios or BMC."
"The stability of the user console and some features could be easier to access."
"Generally, to deploy it will take some downtime, about a day."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the only thing I don't like is the support."
"We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"It's not so easy to set up a test environment, because it's not so easy to get the test license. The vendor only gives you 90 days for a test license; it's a tough license to get."
"I think they can use some improvement on FID."
"Palo Alto's maintenance needs to be improved."
More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco NGIPS is ranked 5th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 62 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is ranked 7th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 24 reviews. Cisco NGIPS is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco NGIPS writes "Very effective for malware and signature-based anomalies but stability needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention writes "A good amount of granularity and advanced URL filtering capabilities". Cisco NGIPS is most compared with Check Point IPS, Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and Trellix Intrusion Prevention System, whereas Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Check Point IPS, Arista NDR, Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Trend Micro Deep Discovery. See our Cisco NGIPS vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention 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.