We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiGate appears to be scalable."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"The usage in general is pretty good."
"Fortinet FortiGate protects against internet-based threats, both internal and external. It is scalable, stable, easy to use, and easy to install."
"It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"Anti-Spam web content filterinG."
"Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."
"Cisco Secure Firewall made it easier so that more than one person can handle things. We are able to have a bigger team that can handle simple tasks and have a smaller team focus on the deep-dive needs."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to block almost all of the ports."
"Integration with all the other Cisco tools is valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion Prevention System."
"Collaboration with other Cisco products such as ISE and others is the most valuable feature."
"The remote access, VPN, and ACL features are valuable. We are using role-based access for individuals."
"Cisco ASA has an okay CLI with a nice GUI."
"Strong in NAT and access-lists."
"The most valuable feature is controlling the traffic and the logging. They have real-time logins for traffic logs. Troubleshooting was very easy for me."
"The VPN is great."
"The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is SD-WAN."
"It is a stable solution, and there are no issues so far."
"One of the most valuable features is having the ability to cluster multiple firewalls even if they are different versions."
"Technical support has been quite helpful in the past."
"Forcepoint is a complete package because it has network and systems applications. Other firewalls are only for the network."
"At first glance, the interface for the device is very confusing."
"If they could extend their fabric towards other vendor environments for integration, that would be great."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"The command line is complicated, and the interface could be better."
"FortiOS is not simple."
"There are just some services that aren't available. For example, the Ethernet or point-to-point protocols. They could add these services to their product offering - especially services for ISPs."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"The solution's deployment is time-consuming, which should be minimized and made more user-friendly for us."
"The SSL VPN is, and always has been, painful to configure and the Java plugin does not guarantee a uniform deployment."
"It should be easier for the IT management or the admin to configure products. For example, the firewall products are not very straightforward for many users. They should be easier to configure and should be more straightforward."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex for those unfamiliar with the solution."
"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."
"The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed."
"In terms of functionality, there isn't much to improve. There could be more bandwidth and better interface speed."
"The annual subscription cost is a bit high. They should try to make it comparable to other offerings. We have a number of Chinese products here in Pakistan, which are already, very cheap and have less annual maintenance costs compared to Cisco."
"They should have a local vendor who can provide support. Most of the support is overseas, so the time zones can be a problem."
"When it comes to a complex deployment, the rules, firewall features, SD-WAN core features, and auto-scaling can cause the device to be not quite stable."
"It's a complicated firewall. Until you come to know the firewall inducers, most people don't like the firewall because the components for the firewall are a little bit complex. User-friendliness is a little bit tough. It needs to be user-friendly when creating policies, and pushing policies. Committing takes more time compared to Palo Alto."
"They should have a GUI on the product itself, not a separate management tool to be used on the management server or on a server to be used to manage the file. It should be all in one device. The device should be controlled through its own GUI. They also have to improve the learning center and the documents as the documents don't really help."
"We feel the product's technical support could be better, as this relates to the solution itself, to the installation of the product, and to having a proper understanding of the case."
"This solution would be improved with the inclusion of custom reporting."
"My team is looking for more throughput and better integration with our security framework."
"Something that I've noticed that Forcepoint lacks, is the training that they offer to their end-customers"
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 31st in Firewalls with 39 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6. 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 Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Good URL filtering with helpful technical support and good scalability". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Darktrace. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall 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.