We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Sangfor NGAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"We purchased Fortinet because of the pricing, its functionality, because it met our requirements, and the total cost of ownership over five years was quite reasonable. In the market, Fortinet is rated quite well."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the rules and quality of service."
"This solution made it very easy to manage our bandwidth."
"It has improved our security capabilities."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"Initial setup is easy to configure."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Quota."
"One of the most valuable features is the AMP. It's very good and very reliable when it comes to malicious activities, websites, and viruses."
"VPN and firewall are good features."
"I think that the firewall feature is the most valuable to me as it is one of the oldest features for this solution. We also appreciate how stable the VPN is."
"The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. Because of our customer experience as an integrator company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have a good performance reputation with Cisco ASA."
"Another benefit has been user integration. We try to integrate our policies so that we can create policies based on active users. We can create policies based on who is accessing a resource instead of just IP addresses and ports."
"Cisco Secure Firewall has improved our customers' security posture because it offers Next-Gen features, granularity, and reporting on the back of it. You can see the amount of users accessing Office 365, for example, and whether they're having a good or bad experience. You can see the threats that are coming into your network. You can see anyone who is compromised from within your network."
"The feature my customers find the most valuable is the exportability."
"Cisco Secure Firewall made it easier so that more than one person can handle things. We are able to have a bigger team that can handle simple tasks and have a smaller team focus on the deep-dive needs."
"We can utilize our own network rather than paying for a private one."
"It enables us to not only detect but also prevent various types of incoming threats, allowing us to take appropriate corrective actions and exercise control over the network."
"You might try Sangfor if you are on a tight budget. The price is affordable, and Sangfor offers a lot of features. We don't have any complaints about Sangfor."
"Sangfor is a good solution that provides a WAF and firewall solution. Most other vendors, like Sophos and Fortinet and Cisco, only provide one solution. That's a valuable feature of Sangfor."
"Sangfor has the best capabilities for securing connections, securing web browsers, securing servers, and general threat protection."
"It's a very simple to use product."
"Sangfor NGAF works accordingly with our customers. The solution has good performance, easy to use, and integrates well with the endpoints."
"The product is very fast and reliable."
"If I had any criticism that I would give FortiGate, it would be that they need to stop changing their logging format. Every time we do a firmware upgrade, it is a massive issue on the SIM. Parsers have to be rebuilt. Even the FortiGate guys came in and said that they don't play well in the sandbox."
"Its reporting can be improved. Sometimes, I don't get proper reports."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"There is a lot of improvement needed with SSL-VPN."
"The policies module in FMC specifically isn't the most user-friendly. Coming from Cisco ASA, Cisco ASA is a little bit easier to use. When you get into particularly complex deployments where you have a lot of different interfaces and all that kind of stuff, it's a little bit tricky. Some usability improvements there would be nice."
"For the new line of FTDs, the performance could be improved. We sometimes have issues with the 41 series, depending what we activate. If we activate too many intrusion policies, it affects the CPU."
"If the implementation was easier, it would be a lot better for us."
"Third-party integrations could be improved."
"The product needs real-time logs to be able to monitor our services, so we can know if any our services have been blocked via the firewall or on the application side."
"The licensing needs simplification."
"Cisco is not cheap, however, it is worth investing in these technologies."
"MSSP oriented interface: I would like a single console which would allow me to manage settings creating consistency across all customers."
"The reporting and log management could be improved."
"The web interface needs to be improved, making it more user-friendly."
"Sangfor could improve by providing better real-time reporting, as the current reports don't offer the level of detail we need, especially for runtime insights."
"The tool is expensive."
"The GUI needs to be improved, lacks logic in some areas."
"An area of improvement for Sangfor NGAF could be in the field of reporting and logging."
"The support for YouTube or the Internet is not enough."
"The interface and user experience are horrible."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Sangfor NGAF is ranked 20th in Firewalls with 31 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and OPNsense. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Sangfor NGAF report.
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.
