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 solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"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."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"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."
"From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"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."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"It is quite an intelligent product."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."
"I like most of Cisco's features, like malware detection and URL filtering."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"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."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"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."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"With the next release, I would like to see some PBR, so that you can do the configuration with the features."
"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."
"The main dashboard of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT could improve."
"I don't think this solution is a time-based control system, because one cannot filter traffic based on time."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
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 12th 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.