We performed a comparison between Cisco NGIPS and KerioControl 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."The initial setup wasn't complex or complicated."
"The most valuable feature is its IPS ability. You are able to balance security and connectivity."
"We are satisfied with the technical support."
"I've found the performance and stability to be the most valuable features of Cisco NGIPS. It is scalable as well."
"It is more or less stable. Sometimes I have some issues normally when we need to upgrade it to newer versions. I think it does the job."
"We use the solution for cybersecurity purposes. The tool helps us to identify anomalies that come from internal or external networks."
"The most valuable features of Cisco NGIPS are the VPN, IPS, access policy management, EIM, and the ASA model as part of Firepower."
"NGIPS lets you map web requests to a specific user to determine who is downloading files and what they are accessing. You can use it to identify users downloading malware or track time wasters using Facebook or something like that. It gives you visibility into what your users are doing on the Internet."
"The firewall and intrusion detection features are very useful these days because hackers have a lot of tricks that they use to get into a system. With Kerio Control you can see something that's happening. Otherwise, you have to use other tools to see what's happening on the firewalls. Having IPS in it is quite useful for us."
"I want to have access to my computer from the outside and Kerio Control plays a role because it has a VPN... It is more reliable because it's a smaller group of computers to target for hackers and the like. The VPN works very well. I use it to work remotely very easily and exchange information, both to and from the location where it's deployed, and there have been no problems there."
"The top features are ones that we're not using yet but we soon will be because we've just had broadband upgraded in Australia. We've got something called the National Broadband Network, which is forced onto you, so you have to take it when it arrives. We'll be trying the high availability out soon. We tried that with some load balancing, it didn't quite work as we expected, but I think that was more of a configuration thing rather than a product thing."
"The interface control manager where we can allocate LAN connections to certain VLANs is the most valuable feature. The other feature that's important for us is because obviously everything is remote with MyKerio, as long as the boat has an internet connection, we can log onto the Kerio and get statistics, as well as provide support."
"Kerio Control can be scaled easily."
"I like intrusion detection and prevention and bandwidth management. The routing part is also awesome. It is a good firewall. We never had a major breach from outside. We've never been impacted by ransomware, and our systems have never been infiltrated."
"Its support is very good, and it is stable product."
"It has helped our organization with testing."
"The pricing is very expensive. They should make their equipment more affordable."
"I would recommend this solution to others for medium, large, and enterprise businesses only."
"Multi-internet line load balancing should be supported."
"The file trajectory, the trace in contamination files, could be improved."
"In the next release I would like to see better reporting. I also find it's hard to act on the data it gives you."
"The biggest problem with most Cisco products is that the interface is lagging behind the competition. The user interface could be updated and improved."
"The GUI could be improved. The pain point is really only focused toward the security engineer who configures it and the operation engineer who manages it."
"The user interface needs some improvement, it is a little rudimentary and not very intuitive."
"We'd like to have more integrations Kerio Operator."
"They don't provide content filtering when it comes to search engine results. We had an incident on the network where a blocked site was showing up in search results. We are in a school environment, so we have blocked a site with some of the explicit content so that kids wouldn't see it. When one of them did a search, the results came on the search engine part. When you try to drill down to the website, it blocks, but when you search by image, it brings up all the images. That's one of the reasons why we are looking at Juniper."
"If I would suggest anything, it would be to expand on its multifactor authentication to be a little bit more user-friendly. They should do multifactor authentications for the client itself perhaps, rather than served on a webpage, in a page hijack, that might be more user-friendly, but I don't have a lot of complaints about it. It's doing its job. You have to have a certain amount of skills to configure these things anyway, the ones that we use on-site doing point-to-point, and we've been tricked up a few times with their interfaces."
"I would like the customer statistics to be more user-friendly. It should explain more what users have been doing throughout the day. Sometimes, it'll just say they downloaded a big file. Meanwhile, they were connected through a VPN."
"The antivirus seemed to be a bit laggy on the connection so I disconnected that. It's definitely good. The only issue we've had with any sort of cyber attack seemed to be coming from a couple of distinct locations, people trying to get into known ports on remote desktops and stuff like that. The fact that we can block all that traffic is just great. It simplifies it."
"I would like it if the interface section had multiple failovers. Although I do have three connections, just in case our physical cables get disconnected, I can only set up one failover as a backup. So, if for some reason our fiber and our AFM went down together, I would have to have it search for our 4G modem. I'd love to have extra backups running."
"Filtering of pages and greater personalization in services need improvement."
"The trial duration of the product should be extended."
Cisco NGIPS is ranked 5th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 63 reviews while KerioControl is ranked 18th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 54 reviews. Cisco NGIPS is rated 8.2, while KerioControl is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco NGIPS writes "Very effective for malware and signature-based anomalies but stability needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KerioControl writes "With VPN, any of our guys can log in to the system and effectively be on board; helps with our customers all over the world". Cisco NGIPS is most compared with Check Point IPS, Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Cisco Sourcefire SNORT, whereas KerioControl is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, OPNsense, Sophos UTM and Sophos XG. See our Cisco NGIPS vs. KerioControl 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.
