We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Qualys VMDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is good to use, and most importantly, the pricing. The customer especially likes the discount when they trade up or something like that."
"We use Cisco IOS Security mostly for routers to route off the firewall. It's a next-generation device."
"In Pakistan, we only use Cisco because they have good local support infrastructure. Huawei and Fortinet don't offer direct support in Pakistan."
"The most valuable feature is endpoint protection."
"Cisco IOS Security increases the overall security of our network, performs authentication, and provides level 15 access and privileges."
"The product is easy to use."
"The solution is very user-friendly and easy to deal with."
"There is a positive impact on security, particularly the intrusion feature, which helps keep the solution concealed and secure."
"One of the main features is that the hardware is extremely reliable."
"It's a good product. After the scan our internet works well. It scans our security posture."
"The initial setup was good. We didn't have any problems with it."
"The prioritization feature is great. I think it has all of the advanced features that we need."
"Intuitive and easy to use."
"It gives a very good overview of the inventory assessment process, and it can be accessed across our company because it's a global tool."
"The most valuable features are vulnerability detection and the scanning capability to enable identification of vulnerabilities across our network."
"Provides great functionality."
"The Vulnerability Management and Patch Management features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Cisco Meraki products are rising very quickly in the cloud and the connected era. Meraki products offer much better ROI, upgradability, and manageability."
"There are problems with the custom reporting of the unique traffic. The data is there, but it is too difficult for us to extract."
"There are some complex administration tasks in their administration portal. That needs to be improved."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"FortiGate is really good. We have been using it for quite some time. Initially, when we started off, we had around 70 plus devices of FortiGate, but then Check Point and Palo Alto took over the place. From the product perspective, there are no issues, but from the account perspective, we have had issues. Fortinet's presence in our company is very less. I don't see any Fortinet account managers talking to us, and that presence has diluted in the last two and a half or three years. We have close to 1,500 firewalls. Out of these, 60% of firewalls are from Palo Alto, and a few firewalls are from Check Point. FortiGate firewalls are very less now. It is not because of the product; it is because of the relationship. I don't think they had a good relationship with us, and there was some kind of disconnect for a very long time. The relationship between their accounts team and my leadership team seems to be the reason for phasing out FortiGate."
"The solution is not user friendly and it is hard to manage the GUI interface."
"I would like to see much more embedded security that works and that isn't a bolt-on."
"Sometimes I find it difficult to manage. Some configurations are difficult for new engineers, for example."
"Cisco IOS Security should improve its functionalities."
"We have a very bad experience on the support. They take too much time requesting logs, and they are not coming directly online to resolve the issues."
"I would love it if it has a link-by-link feature, integration with Unified Threat Management (UTM), and load balancers. They haven't got any link-by-link feature right now, which can be a very attractive option. This link-by-link feature can also be made available for Cisco's UTM firewalls. The link-by-link feature is available in some of the other firewalls. Currently, integration with UTM is missing. Cisco IOS Security also doesn't have the load balancers and a few things that need to be done to get a good UTM firewall. Normally, other firewalls have UTM. As a next-generation firewall, it's good, but as a UTM, it has to do some work."
"We need to pay for the license and it is expensive."
"Cisco IOS Security could improve its security features. There are competitors that have some additional security features, such as Fortinet FortiGate. Additionally, there should be better synchronization with Cisco IOS Security and other vendors, and improved AI features would be beneficial."
"Sometimes we face a problem with accessing the tool and not getting an expected result. From a technology point of view, they need to look into this."
"They should make it accessible for more operating systems."
"There seems to be a lack of easy onboarding into Qualys."
"The only improvement I can think of is on the implementation side. At times it is a bit slow."
"The IoT scan is not great."
"Qualys VM's vulnerability scan could be improved, especially the number of CVE numbers it can manage at a time."
"We are moving away from Qualys to Defender ATP because I find that Defender ATP is much better at prioritizing the vulnerabilities that I should be looking at."
"Its integration with ServiceNow and other similar products is complicated and can be improved. It should also have virtual batching. They should support more standards and compliance requirements and more customizations. For policy compliance, they can add the standards required by the countries in the Middle East. Each country generates its own standards and frameworks, and those frameworks should be there in all products, not only in Qualys. The market here is huge, especially in the cybersecurity field. Qatar has a framework for Qatar 2022, and each and every company in the public or private sector has to follow the Qatar 2022 framework."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 77 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS, Netgate pfSense and OPNsense, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management.
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.
