We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Juniper SRX Series Firewall 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 CLI is robust and powerful, enabling rapid, consistent changes via SSH."
"It performs very well."
"It can expand easily."
"Fortinet offers the latest versions to cater to the needs of enterprises."
"It's very fast and easy to configure."
"Security management tool that's easy to integrate and easy to work with. No issues found with its stability and scalability."
"Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"The feature I like most is the SD-WAN. It allows you to manage more than one ISP at the same time. And there is a high-availability mode, so if one of your ISPs is down, you still have a backup."
"Technical support has been quite helpful in the past."
"It is a stable solution, and there are no issues so far."
"The Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is a scalable product."
"I found the initial setup process to be very simple and straightforward."
"The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly."
"The solution offers sandboxing, which can be integrated at any time."
"The feature that we like the most about Forcepoint is that we know the technology and have confidence in it. We can have several functionalities to simplify operations and management. We can combine functionalities like log ownership to review the number of devices in the infrastructure."
"We like the scalability of Forcepoint because with the Forcepoint NGFW solution, we can scale anything. The solution has central management, so we can manage all the branches and devices centrally in one controller."
"We think they have a good interface, the operating system is good, it's robust. It has plenty of great features, and the relation between the cost and benefits works for our business."
"Juniper SRX Series Firewall is a stable solution."
"The ports are really versatile for their application and don't always have to be used for the purpose for which they were made."
"It helped us with its routing capabilities which eased the cost, because otherwise I would have had to take a router and firewall, and then integrate it. With this, however, it was an integration of firewall and routing services all together in a single product. That was one thing that I loved about it."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"It'sa very secure device, it has good attack prevention capabilities using UTM."
"Commit: You can update the whole configuration without affecting the production. The new configuration will be loaded once the command "Commit" is submitted. You can also do a Commit confirmed to automatically roll back to the previous config after X minutes."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"I would like to see better pricing in the next release, as well as a simplification of the installation."
"Bandwidth usage in reporting could be improved for Fortinet FortiGate."
"It should come integrated or have its own type of network monitor tool in a module. There should just be one package, and you are good to go."
"It's my understanding that more of the current generation features could be brought in. There could be more integration with EDRs, for example."
"The pricing could be a bit better, especially when you consider how they have the most basic offering priced."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"Palo Alto has a feature called WildFire Analysis that is unavailable in FortiGate. WildFire is better than a sandbox because it can address zero-day threats and vulnerabilities. It can immediately identify zero-day threats from the cloud."
"Its management center should be easier to use. The management interface of Forcepoint is unique and a little bit different from some of the firewall solutions on which people might have worked before. Sometimes, the customers say that it is not very friendly, and we help them with how to use this management interface. It just takes a little bit of time, and after some time, it gets easy to manage or use. It is quite similar to Palo Alto, Fortinet, and legacy Juniper solutions. Their support should be faster. We have received complaints that they are not responding fast, which is not good for the vendor and us."
"The ability to dynamically change policies could be improved."
"When it comes to a complex deployment, the rules, firewall features, SD-WAN core features, and auto-scaling can cause the device to be not quite stable."
"They should have a GUI on the product itself, not a separate management tool to be used on the management server or on a server to be used to manage the file. It should be all in one device. The device should be controlled through its own GUI. They also have to improve the learning center and the documents as the documents don't really help."
"The interface is complicated. It's difficult to locate all the necessary menus and functions."
"The solution needs to add an antivirus profile and anti-spyware profile, not just policies and VPN."
"Management could be better. They can improve the management. I think all our customers can't accept firewalls that have standalone management. So, they prefer Fortinet or Palo Alto. But overall, inspection and other features are working fine."
"They need to increase the local support here. There are also some bugs or fixes on which they need to work. They very well know about these bugs. In terms of licensing, I would like them to either increase the number of features in a single license or make licensing more flexible."
"It would be good if Junos had "unique commands" between all hierarchical levels, discarding the use of the "Run" command."
"I would like to have a better web UI for administration. Juniper could simplify the web UI and make it more compatible with mobile devices."
"The training videos that are available need to be improved, and made more educative."
"The pricing strategy of the vendor could improve."
"Does not offer protection for IoT devices"
"It would be ideal if the solution could use cloud services to help update signatures or threat prevention systems."
"Third-party support for Juniper is a lot less than Cisco. This is no surprise, but a definite consideration if you are expecting to use a lot of third party support. In my guesstimate, for every 100 Cisco shops, you will find one Juniper shop."
"The solution is quite advanced. You need a lot of training to use it effectively."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 41 reviews while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 87 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense, whereas Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Check Point NGFW. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Juniper SRX Series Firewall report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and 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.