Compare Cisco ASA NGFW vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire

Cisco ASA NGFW is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 62 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 1st in Advanced Threat Protection with 9 reviews. Cisco ASA NGFW is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco ASA NGFW writes "Gives us visibility into potential outbreaks as well as malicious users trying to access the site". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Cisco ASA NGFW is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX Firewalls and Cisco Firepower NGFW, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW and Zscaler Internet Access.
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: February 2020.
398,567 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
Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.For us, the most valuable features are the IPX and the Sourcefire Defense Center module. That gives us visibility into the traffic coming in and going out, and gives us the heads-up if there is a potential outbreak or potential malicious user who is trying to access the site. It also helps us see traffic generated by an end device trying to reach out to the world.The information coming from Talos does a good job... I like the fact that Cisco is working with them and getting the information from them and updating the firewall.The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic.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 feature of this solution is AMP (Advanced Malware Protection), as this is really needed to protect against cyber threats.I like the Cisco ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager), which is the configuration interface for the Cisco firewall.The technical team is always available when we have problems.

Read more »

Using WildFire has reduced the number of viruses and the amount of malware that comes into our system, which means that I don't have to rely on the end-users to identify it.The way that the solution quickly updates to adjust to threats is the solution's most valuable aspect. When there's a security attack, within five minutes, all Wildfire subscribers have access to updates so that all systems will be safe. Its threat prevention is way better than other vendor products.The most valuable feature is the Automatic Verdict, to recognize whether something is a threat, or not.They have many different options with Palo Alto WildFire and the set-up is quick. If you have all the details in hand, it does not take more than 15 minutes to deploy a firewall.It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN.Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides.It is stable and pretty much scalable.The cloud-based services are a nice feature.

Read more »

Cons
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.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.Our latest experience with a code upgrade included a number of bugs and issues that we ran into. So more testing with their code, before it hits us, would help.The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed.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.I have found that Cisco reporting capabilities are not as rich as other products, so the reporting could be improved.The Sandbox and the Web Censoring in this solution need to be improved.It will be nice if they had what you traditionally would use a web application scanner for. If the solution could take a deeper look into HTTP and HTTPS traffic, that would be nice.

Read more »

It would be nice if there was an easier way to install and deploy it, such as through the inclusion of wizards.The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective.I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product.There are certain changes that I was expecting in the previous version, and I hope that they are soon fixed. All of the problems that I have faced so far have been resolved.Other vendors have some sort of bandwidth management built into the firewall itself and Palo Alto is missing that.As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity.The initial setup was complex.I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.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 are in the process of renewing our three-year license, which costs approximately $24,000 USD for the thirty-six months.The pricing for Cisco products is higher than others, but Cisco is a very good, strong, and stable technology.The program is very expensive.The cost of this solution is high.Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment.

Read more »

We pay between $3,000 and $4,000 CAD ($2,200 - $3,000 USD) per year to maintain this solution.The licensing fees are on an annual basis, and there are no costs in addition to the standard fees.It's pretty expensive but with respect to value for money, it's okay.It is a reasonable price compared to other solutions on the market.The pricing is OK, it is not too expensive.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
398,567 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
out of 50 in Firewalls
Views
70,115
Comparisons
52,516
Reviews
60
Average Words per Review
398
Avg. Rating
7.9
Views
40,455
Comparisons
34,863
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
368
Avg. Rating
8.7
Top Comparisons
Compared 38% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls
Learn
Cisco
Palo Alto Networks
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.

WildFire™ cloud-based threat analysis service is the industry’s most advanced analysis and prevention engine for highly evasive zero-day exploits and malware. The cloud-based service employs a unique multi-technique approach combining dynamic and static analysis, innovative machine learning techniques, and a groundbreaking bare metal analysis environment to detect and prevent even the most evasive threats.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks WildFire
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.Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm19%
Manufacturing Company10%
Comms Service Provider9%
University6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider18%
Media Company8%
Retailer5%
REVIEWERS
Government20%
Comms Service Provider10%
Media Company10%
Healthcare Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company30%
Comms Service Provider16%
Media Company6%
Manufacturing Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise40%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business38%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise44%
REVIEWERS
Small Business46%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise42%
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: February 2020.
398,567 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.