Most Helpful Review
Use Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,312 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.
For us, the most valuable features are the IPX and the Sourcefire Defense Center module. That gives us visibility into the traffic coming in and going out, and gives us the heads-up if there is a potential outbreak or potential malicious user who is trying to access the site. It also helps us see traffic generated by an end device trying to reach out to the world.
The information coming from Talos does a good job... I like the fact that Cisco is working with them and getting the information from them and updating the firewall.
The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic.
The most important point is the detection engine which is now part of the next-generation firewalls and which is supported by Cisco Talos.
The most valuable feature of this solution is AMP (Advanced Malware Protection), as this is really needed to protect against cyber threats.
I like the Cisco ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager), which is the configuration interface for the Cisco firewall.
The technical team is always available when we have problems.
Great security and connectivity.
The solution has many useful features. For example, the solution allows users to create virtual IP addresses.
Performance and stability are the key features of this product.
The solution is very stable. When comparing it to other environments, it's actually quite impressive.
The Layer four features are okay and meet my business needs.
The most valuable feature is SD-WAN.
The most valuable feature of this solution is the support.
The support is great. They also have very good categorization. It's very good. It captures a lot of threats.
The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly.
When our customer needs some optimization, along with performance and security. If they want everything in one package, I recommend Forcepoint because they have everything.
The central security management center and the content management center are very good.
The most valuable feature is controlling the traffic and the logging. They have real-time logins for traffic logs. Troubleshooting was very easy for me.
One of the most valuable features is having the ability to cluster multiple firewalls even if they are different versions.
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.
We were also not too thrilled when Cisco announced that in the upcoming new-gen ASA, iOS was not going to be supported, or if you install them, they will not be able to be managed through the Sourcefire. However, it seems like Cisco is moving away from the ASA iOS to the Sourcefire FireSIGHT firmware for the ASA. We haven't had a chance to test it out.
Our latest experience with a code upgrade included a number of bugs and issues that we ran into. So more testing with their code, before it hits us, would help.
The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed.
Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products.
I have found that Cisco reporting capabilities are not as rich as other products, so the reporting could be improved.
The Sandbox and the Web Censoring in this solution need to be improved.
It will be nice if they had what you traditionally would use a web application scanner for. If the solution could take a deeper look into HTTP and HTTPS traffic, that would be nice.
The interface could be improved, it's not very user friendly.
The solution doesn't offer the same capabilities of Fortinet. It should offer intrusion prevention and advance filtering. These are two very useful features offered on Fortinet that Azure lacks.
The product could be made more customizable.
We find it's different implementing it region-to-region. It might help if it was universal across all regions.
This solution is not mature when it comes to handling perimeter traffic like internet browsing.
Forcepoint would be improved if there were more training available.
Making this solution easier to use would be an improvement.
The solution's support could use improvement.
The optimization is not really ready. If you want very good optimization, you have to add it to the network.
This solution would be improved with the inclusion of custom reporting.
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.
It's a complicated firewall. Until you come to know the firewall inducers, most people don't like the firewall because the components for the firewall are a little bit complex. User-friendliness is a little bit tough. It needs to be user-friendly when creating policies, and pushing policies. Committing takes more time compared to Palo Alto.
Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.
Pricing varies on the model and the features we are using. It could be anywhere from $600 to $1000 to up to $7,000 per year, depending on what model and what feature sets are available to us.
We used Check Point and the two are comparable. Cost was really what put us onto the ASAs... the price tag for Check Point was exorbitantly more than what it is for the ASA solution.
We are in the process of renewing our three-year license, which costs approximately $24,000 USD for the thirty-six months.
The pricing for Cisco products is higher than others, but Cisco is a very good, strong, and stable technology.
The program is very expensive.
The cost of this solution is high.
Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment.
Information Not Available
Forcepoint is very expensive but it's really secure.
We would love to take other solution from Forcepoint, but unfortunately the price is too high. That's why we are not considering using Forcepoing for our proxy and DLB. They have a very good DLB, but the matter in the end is the cost.
I believe the licensing fee is for one year, three years, and five years, or something like that. If you wants to increase the support level from a simpler level to platinum, I think that there's a cost. There are differences between every kind of support, but I don't know the numbers.
The big advantage of this solution is that we can select the right model for our requirements, which is not too expensive.
Compared 38% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls||Forcepoint NGFW, Stonesoft Next Generation Firewall, McAfee Network Security Platform, Intel Security Network Security Platform|
Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device.
Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution.
Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW.
Azure Firewall is a managed, cloud-based network security service that protects your Azure Virtual Network resources. It is a fully stateful firewall as a service with built-in high availability and unrestricted cloud scalability.
|Forcepoint Stonesoft Next Generation Firewall protects enterprise networks with high-performance "intelligence aware" security supported by real-time updates. This enables Stonesoft to deliver the industry's best defense against advanced evasions, alone with complete next-generation firewall protection when and where you need it - at remote sites, branch offices, data centers, and the network edge.|
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Azure Firewall
Learn more about Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall
|There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.|
Information Not Available
|California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)|
Financial Services Firm19%
Comms Service Provider9%
Software R&D Company6%
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider19%
Software R&D Company42%
Comms Service Provider13%
Real Estate/Law Firm7%
Comms Service Provider25%
Software R&D Company16%
No Data Available