We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cisco Sourcefire SNORT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Cisco, Akamai and others in Cloud and Data Center Security."The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"The whole solution is very good, and stable."
"The solution can be integrated with some network electors like Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco ISE, and Active Directory to provide the client with authentication certificates."
"The URL filtering is very good and you can create a group for customized URLs."
"Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."
"The solution is stable."
"It simplifies the configuration process by offering pre-defined base configurations, including security and connectivity settings."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"The implementation could be a bit easier."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
"While the alerts they offer are good, it could improve it in the sense that they should be more detailed to make the alerts more useful to us in general. Sometimes the solution will offer up false positives. Due to the fact that the alerts aren't detailed, we have to go dig around to see why is it being blocked. The solution would be infinitely better if there was just a bit more detail in the alert information and logging we receive."
"To be frank, the product is not really stable, although they're working on that. Whenever I go to the technical community with an issue, they will usually say that it is not there yet, but the technical team are working on it. The issues are not insolvable. I think they should just keep working on the product to make sure that the product can become very stable. The technical support is great. I appreciate that. We have a lot of communities supporting Firepower now, so you can find help for whatever issue you have."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
"If the price is brought down then everybody will be happy."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 3rd in Cloud and Data Center Security with 17 reviews while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 13th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 18 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "An IPS solution for security and protection but lacks stability". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Darktrace.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.