We performed a comparison between Cisco Defense Orchestrator and Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about AlgoSec, Tufin, Palo Alto Networks and others in Firewall Security Management."I like the upgrade feature. That is pretty valuable to me because I have dual ASAs and when I go through CDO it does it for me pretty well. It's all done in the back-end and I don't really have to be involved. I just initiate, pick the image, and I pick when I want it done and it just does it, whether I have a single ASA or have a dual ASA."
"The ability to see the uptimes on the different VPNs that we have configured for site-to-site."
"We have quite a few Active Stone by pairs. If they fail over... I'll see that there's a change on it and I'll have a look. The only change on it is that now this one is the standby, it took over the active role. I can go into that firewall and find out what happened... and troubleshoot based on that. That's pretty cool too."
"The most valuable feature is being able to do centralized upgrades on the ASAs. We can select all of those ASAs, and say, "Upgrade these ASAs at this scheduled time." It will copy down the ASA image, ASDM image, and then do the upgrade and failovers, and then put it all back into service as required at a scheduled time. It automates that process for us."
"With Cisco Defense Orchestrator, we can manage the complete Cisco Security solution. It provides a simple and centralized way to manage all products."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion prevention."
"If our server is blocked, this solution shows us why it is blocked and allows us to update the network routing."
"The solution is quite scalable."
"The applied policy inside the firewall is good."
"The product's user interface is very easy to use and convenient."
"I like its system management and filtering options as a layer seven firewall."
"It's a fine solution in terms of scalability."
"The most valuable aspects are the antivirus and URL filtering."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the intrusion prevention system."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The main thing that would useful for us would the logging and monitoring. I have to check it out, to get the beta, because I don't have access to them... I wanted CDO to be a central place so where I could do everything but right now I don't think that's possible. I really don't want to go back and forth between this and FMC. Maybe the logging portion, when I look at it, will give me some similarities."
"I'd like CDO to be the one-stop-shop where we could do all the configurations easily. It would be nice, for ASA upgrades, if we could do them from a central repository and not have to reach out to Cisco. That would be a definite plus."
"It would be a better product if it incorporated device control for third-party products easily."
"I've found dozens of bugs over the year we've been using it. The more I use it for different things, the more problems I find... Most of the problems have to do with the user interface. A lot of thought and work has gone into the back-end component to make the product do what it's intended to do, but the way it is presented for use hasn't gotten nearly as much thought to make it smart and bug-free."
"It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances."
"We had some MX devices that were blocking Windows Update from happening. We found out it was a Meraki issue, but it would have been nice if it had been flagged for us: "Hey, these updates are failing because the MX is blocking it." It wasn't a huge problem, but there was a loss of our time as well as the fact that the updates didn't get pushed out... It would have been nice if CDO had let us know that that was an issue."
"They need to work on the user interface. It needs to be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components."
"It takes five to seven minutes to push one policy."
"It's not very user-friendly and can be somewhat disorganized."
"Due to the lack of enough tutorials available online, I face problems with Cisco."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The performance of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could be improved."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could improve by being less expensive."
"Areas for improvement include pricing points and the range of products available at any given time."
"Some duplicated values and security standards are not working in some high-application protocols with Cisco's next-generation firewalls."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco Defense Orchestrator is ranked 14th in Firewall Security Management while Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is ranked 7th in Firewall Security Management with 19 reviews. Cisco Defense Orchestrator is rated 8.2, while Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Defense Orchestrator writes "Provides visibility into entire infrastructure and bulk changes save time and resources". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center writes "A stable and reasonably priced product that protects organizations from malware". Cisco Defense Orchestrator is most compared with AlgoSec, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, Tufin Orchestration Suite and Azure Firewall Manager, whereas Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and FireMon Security Manager.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.
