Compare Cisco ASA NGFW vs. FireEye Network Security

Cisco ASA NGFW is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 60 reviews while FireEye Network Security is ranked 4th in Advanced Threat Protection with 13 reviews. Cisco ASA NGFW is rated 7.6, while FireEye Network Security is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco ASA NGFW writes "Enables us to to track traffic in inbound and outbound patterns so we can set expectations for network traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FireEye Network Security writes "It has significantly decreased our mean time in being able to identify and detect malicious threats". Cisco ASA NGFW is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX Firewalls and Cisco Firepower NGFW, whereas FireEye Network Security is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Cisco Stealthwatch and Symantec Advanced Threat Protection.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: September 2019.
371,355 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic.Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.The most important point is the detection engine which is now part of the next-generation firewalls and which is supported by Cisco Talos.The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides.Integration with all the other Cisco tools is valuable.We moved from a legacy firewall to the ASA with FirePOWER, increasing our Internet Edge defense dramatically.Cisco ASA NGFW significantly improves our bank. It protects any high-value products that we use from hackers, viruses, malware, and script-bots. It gives us metrics on network traffic as well as what kind of attacks we are getting from the outside.Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization.

Read more »

If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution.The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money.Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams.The most valuable feature is the view into the application.Application categorization is the most valuable feature for us. Application filtering is very interesting because other products don't give you full application filtering capabilities.It allows us to be more hands off in checking on emails and networking traffic. We can set up a bunch of different alerts and have it alert us.The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks.Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening.

Read more »

Cons
The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed.In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products.There was an error in the configuration, related to our uplink switches, that caused us to contact technical support, and it took a very long time to resolve the issue.With regards to stability, we had a critical bug come out during our evaluation... not good.The product would be improved if the GUI could be brought into the 21st Century.Cisco should improve its user interface design. There is a deep learning curve to the product if you are a newcomer.There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products.

Read more »

It would be a good idea if we could get an option to block based upon the content of an email, or the content of a file attachment.As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web).Improvements could be achieved through greater integration capabilities with different firewall solutions. Integrating with the dashboard itself for different firewalls so users can also pull tags into their firewall dashboard.A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see.Based on what we deployed, they should emphasize the application filtering and the web center. We need to look deeper into the SSM inspection. If we get the full solution with that module, we don't need to get the SSM database from another supplier.I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports.The initial setup was complex because of the nature of our environment. When it comes to the type of applications and functions which we were looking at in terms of identifying malicious threats, there would be some level of complexity, if we were doing it right.It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs.We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement.The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market.Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions.Pricing is high, but it is essentially a corporate decision.The cost is a bit high compared to other solutions in the market.Cisco recently has become very expensive.

Read more »

When I compare this solution to its competitors in the market, I find that it is a little expensive.FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market.We're partners with Cisco so we get a reasonable price. It's cheaper than Palo Alto in terms of licensing.Because of what the FireEye product does, it has significantly decreased our mean time in being able to identify and detect malicious threats. The company that I work with is a very mature organization, and we have seen the meantime to analysis decrease by at least tenfold.There are some additional services that I understand the vendor provides, but our approach was to package all of the features that we were looking to use into the product.The pricing is a little high.Pricing and licensing are reasonable compared to competitors.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
371,355 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
out of 50 in Firewalls
Views
70,048
Comparisons
52,237
Reviews
57
Average Words per Review
309
Avg. Rating
7.9
Views
10,499
Comparisons
7,596
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
364
Avg. Rating
7.6
Top Comparisons
Compared 38% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASAFireEye
Learn
Cisco
FireEye
Overview

Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device.

Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution.

Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW.

FireEye Network Security is an advanced threat protection and breach detection platform that provides industry leading threat visibility and protection against the world’s most sophisticated and damaging attacks. By leveraging FireEye’s unique technologies and threat intelligence, FireEye Network Security detects what other security solutions miss, providing holistic security from the perimeter to the network core.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about FireEye Network Security
Sample Customers
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.FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider11%
Manufacturing Company11%
University8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider15%
Media Company8%
Manufacturing Company6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm36%
University18%
Manufacturing Company18%
Government9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Financial Services Firm21%
Media Company9%
Comms Service Provider7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise38%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business37%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise39%
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise29%
Large Enterprise36%
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: September 2019.
371,355 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email