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."I found the solution to be stable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"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 real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"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."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"It has a huge rate of protection. It's has a low level of positives and a huge rate of threat protection. It's easy to deploy and easy to implement. It has an incredible price rate compared to similar solutions."
"Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
"It is quite an intelligent product."
"The URL filtering is very good and you can create a group for customized URLs."
"It simplifies the configuration process by offering pre-defined base configurations, including security and connectivity settings."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"In general, the features are all great. However, if I need to take hardware for ASA, because they need to upgrade to Firepower, we want to create rules. For that, most of the time we go to the command line. Right now Firepower is working really hard on the grid. You can apply all those rules to the grid. Even if you want to monitor the logs, for example, the activity will tell you which particular user has been blocked because of that rule. Firepower's monitoring interface is very good, because you can see each and every piece. ASA also had it, but there you needed to type the command and be under the server to see all that stuff. In Firepower you have the possibility to go directly to the firewall. The way the monitoring is displayed is also very nice. The feature I appreciate most in Firepower is actually the grid. The grid has worked very well."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"The main dashboard of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT could improve."
"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."
"Performance needs improvement."
"I did not experience any pain points that required improvement. Maybe a couple of false-positives, but that's about it."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
"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."
"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
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.