We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series 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 technical support is great."
"The usage in general is pretty good."
"It enables our organization to become more productive. Also, it protects our NEtWare from viruses and malware."
"There are great templates, so you don't have to customize them if you don't want to. You do have the option to custom create some folders and some reports, however, with what is there, you don't really need to go through extra effort, as they already give you a lot of predefined views of reports and so forth."
"The inspection and web security features are most valuable."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"This product is definitely scalable."
"It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"Performance is a strong point."
"The solution has been good for fulfilling our basic needs."
"It uses many applications, like antivirus blocking and web filtering."
"The virtualization feature is the most valuable feature. Sometimes customers are requesting a private connection using mobile data when they are connecting to remote sites."
"The solution is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain."
"The Juniper SRX series is easy to use."
"CLI: Junos CLI is very easy to use, and it is also very easy to find back items in the configuration and to change them."
"The IPSec configuration is going well."
"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."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"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."
"The server appliance is good."
"The solution can scale."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features."
"The search tool needs improvement. It's very difficult to search for policies right now."
"The biggest "gotcha" is that if the client purchases what they call the UTM shared bundle, which has unified threat management on both, it's not as easy to manage if you have more than one firewall."
"The process of configuring firewall rules appears excessively complex."
"In the next release, I would like to see the interface simplified to be more user-friendly."
"The command line is complicated, and the interface could be better."
"Fortigate's hardware capacities could be improved."
"We would like to see better pricing."
"Junos Space should be improved to be on par with FortiGate's solution for managing firewalls and routing."
"I think Juniper SRX should have a GUI. Some of the competitors are already implementing GUI for the firewall."
"It was very difficult to deal with and required a lot of support, and the UI is very poor."
"It's a good stable firewall, but it's nowhere near what it needs to be for a next-generation type firewall."
"It did not improve our safety because the IDS does not detect some attacks, but our anti-virus software did."
"Juniper SRX Series Firewall has to improve its web content site, like web filtration."
"It would be good if Junos had "unique commands" between all hierarchical levels, discarding the use of the "Run" command."
"Juniper needs to focus more on their perimeter firewalls."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"It is an expensive solution."
"There is a lot of room for Improvement in the offering, from cost to functionality. It is pretty straightforward to implement which is an advantage. However, it falls short in pricing, detection capabilities, and, most importantly, reporting and policy management."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"Management of the appliance could be greatly improved."
"Technical support could be improved."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 35 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Blocks traffic and DDoS attacks ". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Check Point NGFW, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Vectra AI and Check Point SandBlast Network.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
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.