We performed a comparison between Check Point VPN-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."Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"Easy to implement, and it is also reliable."
"It is easy to use and performs very well."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"The Intrusion Prevention System and the web filtering are both working well."
"This is an easy solution to deploy."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"Its most outstanding feature is content filtering."
"Technical support has been good."
"VPN clients are easy to use and deploy."
"The product offers fairly good centralized administration and monitoring with decent capabilities that allow the administrator to have relevent control over devices."
"They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality."
"The firewall and policy side are easy to use."
"Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good."
"VPN load balancing has been particularly essential for my connections to integrate via multiple time zones."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides."
"My confidence continues to build upon using Cisco firewalls."
"The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. Because of our customer experience as an integrator company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have a good performance reputation with Cisco ASA."
"Network segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"WAN load-balancing could be a lot better at detecting when a link is poor or inconsistent, and not just flat out dead."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"FortiGate support could do some improvements on their IPv6 configuration. Right now it's still in the very early stage for utilizing in an enterprise level network environment."
"The license renewal process, annual renewal price, and the web application firewall features should be improved."
"The security of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"The support system could be improved."
"Its customer service could be better."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"The reporting from the file or reporting from mobile access needs improvement. The solution, in general, could use better reporting tools."
"It should have excellent integration with the other security tools."
"Every time we made a change, the policy took about three minutes to apply, and obviously, when there were emergency changes or changes that we needed that were escalated, they were not modified very, very quickly."
"Pricing is sometimes challenging, although it brings a lot of features."
"I would like to see them update the GUI so that it doesn't look like it was made in 1995."
"HTTPs inspection and higher throughput/spec would be good."
"We see a lot of vendors in the market with a lot of niche products. I understand that it's difficult to cover everything, but making it more open for integration with other vendors would be a value add for Cisco."
"Cisco should redo their website so it's actually usable in a faster way."
"The Cisco Secure Firewall could benefit from enhancements in its API, documentation, and automation tools."
"I would like to see more configurable feature parity with Cisco ASA, which is the legacy product that Cisco is moving away from. When configuring remote access VPN, not all of the options are there. You have to download another tool, which means that the configuration takes a little bit longer with Cisco Secure Firewall. Though it's getting there, there are still some features lagging behind."
"The solution’s GUI could be better."
"Setting it up is not as intuitive as other more modern NGFWs."
Earn 20 points
Check Point VPN-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 4 reviews while Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews. Check Point VPN-1 [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point VPN-1 [EOL] writes "Very good IPS, anti-malware, and VPN 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 VPN-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.