We are going to evaluate Barracuda and Cloud Genesys to get a better understanding of VPN issues.

Cisco and Fortinet.

We do not have the experience of comparing it with another NG firewall. However, we can compare it with the traditional hardware-based firewall. I think Barracuda is more flexible because of how it is designed, with the capability to add features. So it is very flexible.

As stated, I’ve worked with firewalls from different vendors, also in quite large environments, but they are no match for the Barracuda NG Firewall, not by a long shot. The vendors were:

• Check Point
• Cisco PIX and ASA
• Juniper NetScreen
• CyberGuard
• SonicWALL
• IIS

I would prefer users to opt for Palo Alto in enterprise-sized environments, like energy companies, health companies, or financial organizations. Compared to Barracuda CloudGen Firewalls, Palo Alto offers its users a little bit more security. Palo Alto's threat prevention, sandboxing functionalities, and web filtering features are good. I don't know the other vendors so well that I could talk about them.

We are evaluating Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Cisco products. In comparison, Barracuda offers a reasonable price.

We were evaluating a lot of appliances/firewalls/UTM like,

• Sonicwall
• Checkpoint
• Bluecoat
• Kerio Control
• Cisco ASA
• Sophos Gateway (formerly Astaro Gateway)

There were also many others that I don´t remember now as well. We were looking for simplicity and effectiveness.

I wasn't part of the evaluation process.

We compared Barracuda with Cisco. We compared Barracuda, at that time, with Fortinet. When we did the comparison we felt Cisco was another great product. But the difference in this case, what made Barracuda the winner, was the price, at that time.

We evaluated a lot of different options. We concluded that Barracuda NG Firewall provided the most features for an exemplary price. 

We also looked at Cisco ASA.