We performed a comparison between AWS Firewall Manager and Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Once this solution is set up, we hardly have to touch it."
"Also, the strength of the community is invaluable."
"The interface is intuitive and it is easy for the users."
"AWS Firewall Manager isn't a separate solution when you create the virtual private cloud (VPC), so you can control the traffic through that security group."
"It has centralized cloud firewall management rules. It provides compliance in tracking and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the centrally managed rule. I also like the central orchestration."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is scalable."
"The most valuable features are the Virtual Private Network and the Electronic Control Lists."
"It's a fine solution in terms of scalability."
"Cisco's support and services are far superior to any other security product in Pakistan."
"The solution is useful and powerful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the intrusion prevention system."
"The product's user interface is very easy to use and convenient."
"One of the most valuable features of Cisco Secure Firewalls is their seamless integration with other Cisco products."
"I would like to see AWS add some UTM features to the firewall. It would also be great if AWS Firewall had native IPS/IDS. They have the separate IPS/IDS, GuardDuty."
"They could consider organizing and enhancing documentation in a more structured and chronological manner"
"Enabling and configuring the logging is not that straightforward."
"This solution is suitable for a small-scale enterprise and may not scale up to a very high volume of traffic or a large number of servers."
"It needs to be more employee-friendly, and the security management could be more efficient."
"The system should be more customizable."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center needs to reduce its price."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The IOS and the deploy option could be improved."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center's logging functionality could be improved."
"Areas for improvement include pricing points and the range of products available at any given time."
"The interface is an area that could be improved."
"Cisco firewalls use old ESR or a Linux system, and there are problems with encryption. When we switch on encryption, the throughput goes down."
"Cisco Firepower has been effective in solving various problems, but it could be improved by making it simpler and more user-friendly like Fortinet."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Firewall Manager is ranked 8th in Firewall Security Management with 6 reviews while Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is ranked 7th in Firewall Security Management with 19 reviews. AWS Firewall Manager is rated 7.8, while Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS Firewall Manager writes "Streamlining security and enhanced file transfer control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center writes "A stable and reasonably priced product that protects organizations from malware". AWS Firewall Manager is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Panorama, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, Azure Firewall Manager, Tufin Orchestration Suite and FireMon Security Manager, whereas Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is most compared with FireMon Security Manager, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Cisco Defense Orchestrator. See our AWS Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.