We performed a comparison between Cato SASE Cloud Platform and Cisco Sourcefire SNORT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Cisco, Zscaler and others in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)."The solution is stable."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"We appreciate the optimization and acceleration of the performance of SDP users."
"It is a stable solution...it is a scalable solution."
"It is quite simple and easy to use."
"The product is very simple, and everything can be done very quickly."
"The most valuable feature of Cato Networks is the CASB and the documentation is useful."
"The most valuable feature is that it also works as a next-gen firewall because it has security features."
"The most valuable features of Cato Networks are the always-on VPN for remote workers and centralized management. Additionally, web filtering and antivirus are good."
"The query and the SD-WAN are useful features of the solution."
"The solution can be integrated with some network electors like Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco ISE, and Active Directory to provide the client with authentication certificates."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."
"In general, the features are all great. However, if I need to take hardware for ASA, because they need to upgrade to Firepower, we want to create rules. For that, most of the time we go to the command line. Right now Firepower is working really hard on the grid. You can apply all those rules to the grid. Even if you want to monitor the logs, for example, the activity will tell you which particular user has been blocked because of that rule. Firepower's monitoring interface is very good, because you can see each and every piece. ASA also had it, but there you needed to type the command and be under the server to see all that stuff. In Firepower you have the possibility to go directly to the firewall. The way the monitoring is displayed is also very nice. The feature I appreciate most in Firepower is actually the grid. The grid has worked very well."
"The whole solution is very good, and stable."
"Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is easy to configure and the reporting is great. It's also very user-friendly."
"The solution is stable."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"We would like the product to continue to improve its security."
"A little tweaking or improvement of the UI in terms of logging when troubleshooting would be an improvement because it's very detailed."
"They can't do one-to-one NAT (Network Address Translation) in AP (their access point), and that is something that Palo Alto can do."
"There's no principal in Malaysia, only a distributor."
"The solution is not cheap."
"I would like to see better integration with identity providers."
"They should add more sophisticated security features. It should also be integrated into the cloud."
"Cato Networks security could be better."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"While the alerts they offer are good, it could improve it in the sense that they should be more detailed to make the alerts more useful to us in general. Sometimes the solution will offer up false positives. Due to the fact that the alerts aren't detailed, we have to go dig around to see why is it being blocked. The solution would be infinitely better if there was just a bit more detail in the alert information and logging we receive."
"Integration with other components — even Cisco's own products — can be enhanced to improve administrative experience."
"The pricing needs to be improved. We have lots of low-budget clients around us. Budget constraints are always a deterrent in our market."
"With the next release, I would like to see some PBR, so that you can do the configuration with the features."
"Performance needs improvement."
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 5th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 21 reviews while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 13th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 18 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cato SASE Cloud Platform writes "Useful remote worker VPN, centralized management, and simple on-boarding process". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "An IPS solution for security and protection but lacks stability". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco SD-WAN, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet FortiGate and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Darktrace.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) 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.
