We performed a comparison between Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] and Cisco Secure Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The payment function for applications is good."
"The most valuable features are the enterprise modeling and the simple interface."
"Its performance in fulfilling our requirements has been satisfactory."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"The flexibility and ease of configuration are the most valuable features."
"The scalability of Fortinet FortiGate is good."
"The interface is very good."
"I have found Fortinet FortiGate to be scalable."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature for us was to implement negligent functionality, to direct functionality to viewer control and application control so we could disconnect, and at the same time, we installed checkpoints. We disconnected our proxy."
"The solution is very robust."
"The filtering was very good."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"We can create a domain to separate and segregate some functions, some services."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality."
"The architecture of FTD is great because it has an in-depth coverage and because it uses the AVC, (Application, Visibility, and Control) and also rate limits. Also, the architecture of fast paths is great."
"It just works for us."
"Its ability to work with the traffic."
"Cisco Secure Firewall is robust and reliable."
"Once configured to suit your needs, these firewalls are rock solid appliances."
"This product is pretty stable."
"Malicious URLs are being blocked."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"You do need some IT knowledge in order to effectively work with the solution."
"Some of the features in the graphical user interface do not work, which requires that we used the command-line-interface."
"In terms of what could be improved, the SD-WAN is quite difficult, because if you install the new box, 15 is okay, but if you change from an old configuration, if there is already configuration and a policy when you change to SD-WAN, you must change the whole policy that you see in the interface."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"When we cluster the two Fortinet FortiGate boxes together we have some issues."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve the integration with Active Directory. Additionally, I would like to have a Cloud Controller, such as they do in the Cisco Meraki solution."
"The solution could be improved if there was a better way to report. The reporting functionality is not really good. Even though it's not the major function. Maybe adding a way to make a custom report."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade."
"Technical support was very bad because the supplier who sold it to us, wasn't very supportive, and he wouldn't giving us direct links to the OEM."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"The interface needs improvement."
"What has been the issue of firewalls is they ask me for policies and content filtering application control and all these features that are now part of Harmony."
"Cisco Secure Firewall’s customer support could be improved."
"The performance should be improved."
"Antivirus features must be integrated for end user security."
"When we first got it, we were doing individual configuring. Now, there is a way to manage from one location."
"There is room for improvement in the stability or software quality of the product. There were a few things in the past where we had a little bit of a problem with the product, so there is room for improvement."
"For the new line of FTDs, the performance could be improved. We sometimes have issues with the 41 series, depending what we activate. If we activate too many intrusion policies, it affects the CPU."
"In the past though, colleagues have had issues during the upgrade process. The failover didn't work and production was down."
"The initial setup was complex."
Earn 20 points
Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 19 reviews while Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews. Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] writes "Great firewalls, VPN, and Intrusion prevention capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls.
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.
