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 scalability is good in Fortinet FortiGate."
"The solution can scale well."
"The user interface (UI) is very, very good."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"There are great templates, so you don't have to customize them if you don't want to. You do have the option to custom create some folders and some reports, however, with what is there, you don't really need to go through extra effort, as they already give you a lot of predefined views of reports and so forth."
"The most valuable features are SD-WAN, application control, IPS control, and FortiSandbox."
"The multi-tenancy feature is most valuable. It integrates very well with FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The user interface is easy to navigate."
"All the features except IPS are valuable. IPS is not a part of my job."
"It is easy to create interfaces and routing, which all can be done at the GUI level."
"We feel that we can trust the security, and our assets and business are well protected. We need to have trust in it, but we also see that it works. We have a security company that has tested that it works."
"The most valuable feature is the access control list (ACL)."
"Cisco tech is always good and helpful. I would rate them as 10 out of 10."
"The AnyConnect remote access VPN gives us an easy way to deploy remote working for our users."
"I like the way Firepower presents the data. It gives you two classifications for the evidence, something based on the priority of the evidence and another classification based on the impact of the evidence in your environment. This makes it very easy to spot the evidence that is most impactful to my environment. Instead of having to go through all the evidence based on that priority, I can focus on the evidence that has the most impact on my environment."
"The stability of Sangfor NGAF is good."
"In our hospital, Sangfor NGAF works well for us in terms of ensuring confidentiality and availability, which are crucial in the healthcare industry."
"SSL VPN is the best feature."
"The price versus value is good because the solution is less expensive than Sophos, Fortinet, or SonicWall."
"The absolute best part of Sangfor NGAF is their support. It's a 24/7 support channel, and the last time I requested their assistance I got a reply within three minutes. They helped solve the problem immediately."
"Technical support is very good."
"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."
"Sangfor NGAF's standout feature is its powerful application control, enabling precise restrictions on mobile user access to approved applications."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"There are problems with the custom reporting of the unique traffic. The data is there, but it is too difficult for us to extract."
"The UTM filtering needs improvement."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"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."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"There are some complex administration tasks in their administration portal. That needs to be improved."
"It does not have key authentication for admin access."
"My team tells me that other solutions such as Fortinet and Palo Alto are easier to implement."
"The interface for monitoring could be improved to allow better views to make troubleshooting easier."
"I would like to see the inclusion of more advanced antivirus features in the next release of this solution."
"It seems very clunky and slow. I would like to be able to tune it to be a more efficient product."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex for those unfamiliar with the solution."
"I think that the solution can be improved with the integration of application-centric infrastructure. It could be used to have better solutions in one box."
"Cisco makes horrible UIs, so the interface is something that should be improved."
"The use of it has really bogged down our response time for certain problems, given we have to go through AT&T for everything."
"Sangfor need greater exposer in the market because the market is mainly saturated by Fortinet. The user experience of Fortinet is quite different compared to NGAF. If we want to switch our users from Fortinet to NGAF, we have to convince them that the user experience will be much easier once once they start to use it."
"There is room for improvement in dependency on certain infrastructure, like the DNS dependency on the current DNS server that the company has. It should be standalone. It should not depend on any other DNS server."
"The product must provide more IPS features."
"The reporting and log management could be improved."
"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."
"Sangfor NGAF could improve by refining its application control policies, especially in addressing challenges with certain types of applications."
"Our experience with its customer support was quite challenging."
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.