Most Helpful Review
Researched Juniper SRX but chose Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall: A flexible and easy to manage solution for segregating our servers from the rest of the environment
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Juniper SRX and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,557 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.
The traffic inspection and the Firepower engine are the most valuable features. It gives you full details, application details, traffic monitoring, and the threats. It gives you all the containers the user is using, especially at the application level. The solution also provides application visibility and control.
If we look at the Cisco ASA without Firepower, then one of the most valuable features is the URL filtering.
It's easy to integrate ASA with other Cisco security products. When you understand the technology, it's not a big deal. It's very simple.
The benefits we see from the ASA are connected to teleworking as well as, of course, having the basic functionality of a firewall in place and the prevention of attacks.
On the network side, where you create your rules for allowing traffic — what can come inside and what can go out — that works perfectly, if you know what you want to achieve. It protects you.
If you have a solution that is creating a script and you need to deploy many implementations, you can create a script in the device and it will be the same for all. After that, you just have to do the fine tuning.
They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality.
The main benefit of the Check Point Virtual Systems solution is its ability to split up the hardware appliances that we have into several logical, virtual devices with separate traffic handling policies, as well as the switching and routing.
The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support.
As per the solution's blade design, there are many options. For example, you have to buy a UTM blade and an advanced malware blade, etc. If the blade license is there, we can configure from the firewall GUI.
A unique architecture makes this product stand out from other solutions.
The IPS, application and URL filtering, as well as Identity Awareness, are all very valuable features.
We find Check Point valuable because they are 100% focused on security. It totally closes the potential vulnerability channel. We can check our mail and our attachments and we can scan everything easily. We get an immediate report about the situation of the attachments. We can discover if the target's security attack was started from phishing, etc. We also enjoy using the additional features that protect our internal customer from targeted attacks.
The program is very stable.
The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can start off with a simple firewall and expand it to UTM.
Juniper is one of the most powerful network security solutions while remaining simple to use, set up, and scale.
The most valuable feature is the licensing scheme for security functions.
Performance is a strong point.
The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control.
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.
I like the routing and firewall features.
The solution's stability is very good.
I've found the security features, such as IDS and the VPN most valuable.
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.
Security generally requires integration with many devices, and the management side of that process could be enhanced somewhat. It would help if there was a clear view of the integrations and what the easiest way to do them is.
One area where the ASA could be improved is that it doesn't have AMP. When you get an ASA with the Firepower model, ASA with FTD, then you have advanced malware protection.
If I want to activate IPS features on it, I have to buy another license. If I want Cisco AnyConnect, I have to buy another license. That's where we have challenges.
Cisco missed the mark with all the configuration steps. They are a pain and, when doing them, it looks as if we're using a very old technology — yet the technology itself is not old, it's very good. But the front-end configuration is very tough.
Cisco provides us with application visibility and control, although it's not a complete solution compared to other vendors. Cisco needs to work on the application behavior side of things, in particular when it comes to the behavior of SSL traffic.
It is expensive.
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.
As an administrator, I can say that among all of the Check Point products I have been working with so far, the Virtual Systems solution is one of the most difficult.
Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware.
If you compare the GUI with the Palo Alto and Forcepoint in the Cisco, they're very easy. Check Point, due to its design, is a little bit complex. They should make the GUI easy to use so that anyone can understand it easily, like Fortinet's GUI. Many companies end up using Fortinet because the GUI is very easy, and there's no need for training. They just deploy the box and do the configuration.
It can be difficult to install properly without prior training
Sometimes, if you aren't familiar with the solution, it can be a bit complex, but it does become easier to use with time. However, every time they launch a new version, it becomes more complex and you need to take time to get familiar with all the changes. For every version that they upgrade, you need to upskill yourself.
The stability of the solution could be improved, but this is the problem of all the solutions in the market. This isn't just a problem specific to Check Point.
It is a very expensive program and there are additional costs despite the standard licensing fees.
The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use.
It could have features that other products support like blade options and stand-alone endpoint security.
In the next release, I would like to see the remote access client improved as well as improvements made to the administration GUI.
There are a lot of features that customers do not know about and I think that better documentation would help when it comes to learning how to use the product.
It should be easier to escalate support tickets.
IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated.
The workplace management console needs improvement. It should be a little bit more developed. Also, the interface needs a bit more improvement.
The big thing is performance. With all the features turned on it slows down.
In terms of other features, I'd like to see a web filter, 10 point control, application control and a DNA filter in the next release.
Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.
There is room for improvement in the pricing when compared to the market. Although, when you compare the benefits of support from Cisco, you can adjust the value and it becomes comparable, because you usually need very good support. So you gain value there with this device.
When it comes to Cisco, the price of everything is higher. Cisco firewalls are expensive, but we get support from Cisco, and that support is very active.
It's a brilliant firewall, and the fact that it comes with a perpetual license really does go far in terms of helping the organization in not having to deal with those costs on an annual basis. That is a pain point when it comes to services like the ones we have on Fortigate. That's where we really give Cisco firewalls the thumbs up.
Cisco is expensive, but you do get benefits for the price.
In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.
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 pay approximately €150,000 ($166,000 USD) per year.
It is more expensive than other solutions and would be more competetive in the market if it came down in price.
On average, it is normally on the lower end, being less expensive than Palo Alto or Cisco.
Compared to other vendors, the pricing of this solution is good.
There was no additional licensing cost because there were no IPS services. It was just a firewall IP circuit router so they have the default licensing. We just need to renew the support yearly.
The price of this solution is more than other products, but it's stable, and the technical support is better than I have seen with others.
While the price of support is expensive, the price of the solution, itself, is not.
The pricing is perhaps half, probably forty percent, of Cisco.
The direct support with Juniper is expensive. When you stop using the solution and miss one year of payments, if you want the support back on a specific node, they ask you to pay for the year that you haven't used the node.
In terms of pricing, Juniper is in the middle. The most expensive firewall is Palo Alto. If a customer wants the cheapest price they should go for FortiGate. Juniper is in between these products.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Fortinet FGs: Great devices, relatively easy to deploy and maintain. Cheaper than most devices of their kind. If you're looking for a lot of features at a relatively low price point this is the way to… more »
Top Answer: They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality.
Top Answer: In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Question: What do you like most about Juniper SRX?
Top Answer: The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control.
Question: What needs improvement with Juniper SRX?
Top Answer: When we first tested the serial interface on our model, it did not work. It should be easier to escalate support tickets.
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 43% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 34% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco ASA Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls||Check Point VSX||SRX|
Cisco ASA firewalls deliver enterprise-class firewall functionality with highly scalable and flexible VPN capabilities to meet diverse needs, from small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide range of models, Cisco ASA can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Flexible VPN capabilities include support for remote access, site-to-site, and clientless VPN. Also, select appliances support clustering for increased performance, VPN load balancing to optimize available resources, advanced high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco ASAv is the virtualized version of the Cisco ASA firewall. Widely deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco ASAv is ideal for remote worker and multi-tenant environments. The solution scales up/down to meet performance requirements and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco ASAv can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Check Point Virtual Systems taps the power of virtualization to consolidate and simplify security for private clouds while delivering a lower total cost of ownership. It enables customized security against evolving network threats with the extensible Software Blade Architecture. Virtual Systems is supported on Check Point Appliances, including the 61000 Security System as well as open servers.
Learn more about Virtual systems
|High-performance security with advanced, integrated threat intelligence, delivered on the industry's most scalable and resilient platform. SRX Series gateways set new benchmarks with 100GbE interfaces and feature Express Path technology, which enables up to 1 Tbps performance for the data center.|
Learn more about Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall
Learn more about Check Point Virtual Systems
Learn more about Juniper SRX
|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.||Bentley Systems, Almaviva TSF S.p.A, Yankuang Group, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.||7-Eleven, AARNet Pty Ltd, Allegro Networks, alltours GmbH, Apollo Hotel Papendrecht, Armstrong Atlantic State University, Atlantech Online, Availity, Bajaj Capital, Baloise Insurance, BancABC, BAS Group, Black Lotus, Blue Box, Borealis, Carilion Clinic, Catholic Health System, CATV, Champlain College, Chinas Ministry of Railways, China University of Mining and Technology (CUMT), Cloud Dynamics, CloudSeeds, Cloudwatt, CODONiS, Colt Technology Services, Cork Internet Exchange, CSS Versicherung AG, CyrusOne, Danish Crown, Deloitte Belgium, Department of Energy, Divona Telecom, DQE Communications, DreamHost, European Government Agency, Expedient, Financial Market Information Services Provider, Fluidata, Fonality, Fox Sports, Global Financial Institution, Global Investment Bank, Global Investment Company, Energy Sciences Network (ESnet), Goethe University, HEAnet, High Performance Networks Inc., Hillenbrand|
Financial Services Firm20%
Comms Service Provider9%
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider22%
Financial Services Firm25%
Computer Software Company39%
Comms Service Provider20%
Comms Service Provider56%
Financial Services Firm17%
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider31%
K 12 Educational Company Or School4%
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.