We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are very comparable. The only major difference between the two is that some users of Cisco Secure Firewall consider the deployment to be somewhat complex.
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"The simplicity of the product is great. It's very easy to use, which is a compliment we get all the time in terms of feedback."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"It is a very user-friendly product."
"ASA integrates with FirePOWER, IPS functionality, malware filtering, etc. This functionality wasn't there in the past. With its cloud architecture, Cisco can filter traffic at the engine layer. Evasive encryptions can be entered into the application, like BitTorrent or Skype. This wasn't possible to control through a traditional firewall."
"Cisco Firepower NGFW is really easy to use right now to determine when my file requires a shift from primary to secondary status, and it can be done with automation. Earlier we used to do this with patching."
"Firepower has reduced our firewall operational costs by about 25 percent."
"I think Cisco ASA Firewall is the most stable firewall solution."
"The user interface is very easy to manage and find rules. You can do object searches, which are very easy. Also, the logging is very simple to use. So, it is a lot easier to troubleshoot and find items inside the firewall."
"There are no issues that we are aware of. It does its job silently in the background."
"Beats sophisticated cyber attacks with a superior security appliance."
"The solution has good performance and is easy to use."
"The valuable features of this solution are the VPN, load balancer, and the QoS for splitting the ISP band."
"It is very user friendly and easy to manage from the administrative point of view. It is good, reliable, and easy to implement."
"The interface is user-friendly and the product is easy to configure."
"The most valuable feature I have found to be the reporting function."
"The most valuable feature is the central dashboard"
"The most valuable feature is the Intercept X. It is the advanced features that are used for malware detection, and antivirus."
"Dashboard is easy to use and the reporting offers a lot of detail."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"One issue that I have had is that sometimes I need to monitor the traffic, so I need to filter it according to the user and which user is using it the most. I experience a bottleneck most of the time, particularly at the peak time when the number of contracts and users are at maximum."
"Fortinet should focus on enhancing the capabilities of FortiGate by consolidating its various products, such as FortiGate Cloud, FortiManager, and FortiAnalyzer."
"The user interface could be improved to make it less confusing and easier to set up."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve if it had a cloud-managed solution."
"Currently, FortiGate is providing SSL VPN. But they're missing some features that are available in Palo Alto's SSL VPN."
"The support structure needs to be improved because every time we contact them, there is a delay in the response."
"The graphical interface should be improved to make the configuration easier, to do things with a single click."
"One area that could be improved is its logging functionality. Your logs are usually displayed on the screen, but if you want to go back one or two days, then you need another solution in place because those logs are overwritten within minutes."
"Licensing is complex, and I'd like it to be simplified. This is an area for improvement."
"You shouldn't have to use the ASDM to help manage the client."
"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."
"One thing that Cisco could improve is the GUI. The graphic user interface should be more user-friendly."
"There is limited data storage on the appliance itself. So, you need to ship it out elsewhere in order for you to store it. The only point of consideration is around that area, basically limited storage on the machine and appliance. Consider logging it elsewhere or pushing it out to a SIEM to get better controls and manipulation over the data to generate additional metrics and visibility."
"I would like it to have faster deployment times. A typical deployment could take two to three minutes. Sometimes, it depends on the situation. It is better than it was in the past, but it could always use improvement."
"The number of ports, especially on the entry-level appliances, should be increased."
"We had a difficult time assigning IP addresses to specific MAC addresses."
"The product's user interface has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"Its price should be improved. It should be cheaper."
"The interface can bit a bit more user-friendly."
"They need to do more quality checks before they release firmware upgrades. Currently, a few Cyberoam firewall customers are facing some issues while upgrading the Cyberoam firmware to Sophos. After the new firmware is installed, they are seeing some performance issues, which require some bug fixes. The performance is fine after getting the required support. Customers who are already using Sophos hardware are quite satisfied with this solution. Their support should also be improved. We are facing difficulties getting support on time through email or phone."
"I would want the level of integration to have another device on your network that is also reliable."
"Integration with Active Directory is not reliable."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Check Point NGFW. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Sophos XG report.
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.
My preference is the Sophos XGS, particularly when you team it up with the Sophos Endpoint Protection client and configure it for synchronized security.
Both can be managed through Sophos Central and are available at a decent price for the power they offer the SMB.
I recommend Sophos XGS firewall. It will offer the best solution for malware protection.
Also, I recomend Sophos CIXA with XDR (Sophos Endpoint), so you can use Syncronized Security.