We performed a comparison between Check Point IPS and Cisco NGIPS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Check Point offers DDoS and endpoint protection called EDR or XDR, so it provides a holistic security architecture for any organization."
"IPS can protect our organization with any old vulnerabilities or if any vulnerability detected minutes ago IPS can protect us as per our configured policy."
"The reports are useful in helping to verify the threats where we can see the level of severity in order to be able to take action."
"The number of the IPS protections is amazing - after the latest update I see more than 11000 in the SmartConsole."
"Protection in real-time is very good. It helps us detect things on time and make decisions to improve perimeter security."
"There's less admin burden to detect these threats as Check Point IPS will do it all for you and suggest the best preventive actions to protect the network."
"Among its great features is the ability to detect outgoing malware or extraction of compromised data and stop it, thus safeguarding us by isolating the network, the equipment, or the identity of the affected users."
"It is also worth noting that many IPS signature comes with detailed background about the vulnerability, and potentially how the vulnerability would affect the network security."
"It has helped to improve our cybersecurity and our network security posture."
"The most valuable feature is its IPS ability. You are able to balance security and connectivity."
"The most valuable feature would be the IPS is very important in Cisco Firepower because I can configure deep configuration in IPS and tuning."
"The solution is very stable."
"The Malware Detection, threat defense, sandboxing, VPN and mail security have all been valuable features of Cisco NGIPS."
"Cisco is number one in the technical support. It's good technical support and this is actually a problem when we do the recruitment for some other products. Other products you are on hold forever and the support might be not the best compared to Cisco."
"The integration with the Cisco portfolio is very helpful."
"The most valuable features are the intrusion detection ones."
"The pain point that I have with this solution is contacting technical support."
"Threat Prevention policies are not very easily manageable as there are several profiles/policies/etc. Therefore, there are several ways to add exceptions and check the configuration."
"The dashboard reports can be easier to generate and customize."
"It would be good to update the public documentation of Check Point so that we can generate improvements and best practices based on the documentation."
"The solution needs enhanced reporting. The reporting on Cisco Stealthwatch and Darktrace is much bigger. The visibility that they grant for the filtering capabilities over large infrastructures are far superior."
"Sometimes Check Point documentation is not always updated, which is why when some implementations change, it generates confusion about details."
"I would like to have the possibility of adding features to this IPS solution in the future."
"The tool's pricing could be better."
"The file trajectory, the trace in contamination files, could be improved."
"I think that some initiation scripts might be helpful because they would make the configuration easier and more user-friendly for customers."
"The integration can be more secure."
"We don't like its licensing model. It has separate licensing for all the features. For instance, to get URL filtering, you need to buy another license. Every feature set seems to require another license. Unless you purchase them all upfront, you find some surprises and realize that you can't do that because you need another license. Its logging isn't quite as good as it used to be in our previous solution. We used to have Cisco ASA, and we could view the logs a lot easier than NGIPS (also known as Firepower). We saw real-time logging, but we don't see that as much in Firepower."
"I think the part of IPS and everything else needs to be better equated to the real needs or current needs of the business compared to the other manufacturer, because it is not straightforward, a way to configure it compared to the other competitors."
"Overall, it lacks user-friendliness. It could be easier to manage. I can train any customer using FortiGate or Palo Alto in a few days, but with Cisco, it takes much more time because the systems aren't easy to use."
"My opinion is that this solution should improve the pricing."
"I would like to see Cisco NGIPS to include home office support in one single product."
Check Point IPS is ranked 3rd in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 46 reviews while Cisco NGIPS is ranked 5th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 63 reviews. Check Point IPS is rated 8.6, while Cisco NGIPS is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point IPS writes "Great for detection and access with the capabilities of defining specific rules". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco NGIPS writes "Very effective for malware and signature-based anomalies but stability needs improvement". Check Point IPS is most compared with Darktrace, Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System and Fortinet FortiGate IPS, whereas Cisco NGIPS is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and Trellix Intrusion Prevention System. See our Check Point IPS vs. Cisco NGIPS report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.