We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The base firewall features are quite valuable to us."
"The product is easy to use and is stable. The SV1 functionality is a benefit."
"From the firewall perspective, the rules and policies are very sufficient and easy to use."
"I like that you are able to manage FortiGate from the FortiManager to create a more centralized environment."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"The security features are about the best that I've seen anywhere."
"LinkGreat firewall capabilities"
"The performance is good."
"The stability is good. Very simple. Upgrades are great."
"The VPN feature is the most valuable to us because it accomplishes the task well. We're able to do everything we need to do."
"Its ability to work with the traffic."
"Cisco's engineer helped us with a lot of scripting to see what existed. Previously, we didn't have a proper policy. In fact, we didn't have any policy because we didn't have any firewall for the data center, so generating a policy was a big challenge. Cisco's engineer helped us to do some scripting and find out what kind of policy we can have and organize those policies. That was nice."
"It is scalable and stable."
"It helped us a lot with our VPNs for the home office during COVID. There has been more security and flexibility for VPNs and other applications."
"Cisco ASA has an okay CLI with a nice GUI."
"Another benefit has been user integration. We try to integrate our policies so that we can create policies based on active users. We can create policies based on who is accessing a resource instead of just IP addresses and ports."
"I also like its logging method. Its logging is very powerful and useful for forensic purposes. You can see the traffic or a specific activity or how something entered your network and where it went."
"Very functional and good for detecting malicious traffic."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"The solution can scale."
"Over the thirteen years of using the product, we have not experienced a single compromise in our environment. During the COVID period, we faced numerous DDoS attacks, and the tool proved highly effective in mitigating these threats."
"We see ROI in the sense that we don't have to react because it stops anything from hurting the network. We can stop it before we have a bigger mess to clean up."
"The support we receive when we need to upgrade is not satisfactory and has room for improvement."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"It's my understanding that more of the current generation features could be brought in. There could be more integration with EDRs, for example."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"<p>If there is old hardware, or appliances, it does not necessarily work with the new Cisco generation firewalls."
"The maturity needs to be better."
"There should be more integration with Microsoft Identity."
"Integration aspects and traffic shaping need improvement."
"We are replacing ASA with FTD which offers many new features not available using ASA."
"Most of the time, when I try to run Java, it is not compatible with ASA's current operating systems."
"Cisco is not cheap, however, it is worth investing in these technologies."
"The throughput highlighted on the datasheet (10Gbps) should be reviewed. This throughput is only for a UDP running environment, which you will never find in the real world. Rather consider a multiprotocol throughput."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
"Management of the appliance could be greatly improved."
"Improvements could be achieved through greater integration capabilities with different firewall solutions. Integrating with the dashboard itself for different firewalls so users can also pull tags into their firewall dashboard."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"The product's integration capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"They can maybe consider supporting some compliance standards. When we are configuring rules and policies, it can guide whether they are compliant with a particular compliance authority. In addition, if I have configured some rules that have not been used, it should give a report saying that these rules have not been used in the last three months or six months so that I disable or delete those rules."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 35 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Blocks traffic and DDoS attacks ". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Vectra AI and Netgate pfSense.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.