Most Helpful Review
Has next gen features like application awareness and intrusion protection but the CLI needs to be simplified
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Firepower NGFW vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
346,641 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
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.
The feature that I found most valuable is the overall stability of the product.
The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. Because of our customer experience as an integrator company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have a good performance reputation with Cisco ASA.
I would say the Firepower module is most valuable. I'm trying more to transition to this kind firewall. I had to study a little on Palo Alto Networks equipment. There is a lot I have to learn about the difference.
We have multiple secure internal networks linked with our plants. We are from a oil company, so we have multiple plant areas which need to have restricted network access. Therefore, we are using it for restricting access to the plant area.
They wanted to leverage something which is equivalent that can give them the next gen features like application awareness and intrusion protection. So that is a major reason they were looking forward to this. The original ASA firewall did not have these features. This was the major reason the customer moved on to Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD). Now they can go ahead and leverage those functionalities.
I believe that the architecture of packet processing is the most valuable feature.
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.
An eight because it's a good security solution. It's more mature than its competitors.
Because of the deeper inspection it provides we have better security and sections that allow users broader access.
We chose Cisco because it had the full package that we were looking for.
Stability is perfect. I haven't had any problems.
The architecture of FTD is great because it has an in-depth coverage and because it uses the AVC, (Application, Visibility, and Control) and also rate limits. Also, the architecture of fast paths is great.
Embedding it into my application development lifecycle prevents data loss and business disruption, allowing the adoption to operate at the speed of my AWS Cloud.
It has a good performance which helps you with the stability of your virtual environment.
In AWS, Palo Alto provides us a better view than flow logs for network traffic.
App-ID and User-ID have repeatedly shown value in securing business critical systems.
It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are.
You already can scale it if you put it in Auto Scaling groups. If you put it in a load balancer, it should already be able to scale.
It allows us to see all our traffic to properly secure it and only allow what is needed through the firewall.
It offers a single pane of glass for all the different types of installations.
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.
One of my main concerns, an area that could use improvement is in adjusting the need to buy a license to enable features.
Usually, the customers are satisfied, but I am going to recommend that all clients upgrade to FirePOWER management. I want Cisco to improve the feature called anti-spam. We use a Cisco only email solution, that's why we need the anti-spam on email facility.
The installation and integration of Cisco ASA with FirePOWER can be improved. The management with Fortigate is easier than Cisco ASA on FirePOWER. The management side of Cisco ASA can be improved so it can be more easily configured and used.
Most of the time, when I try to run Java, it is not compatible with ASA's current operating systems.
I was just trying to learn how this product actually operates and one thing that I see from internal processing is it does fire-walling and then sends it to the IPS model and any other model that needs to be performed. For example, content checking or filtering will be done in a field processing manner. That is something that causes delays in the network, from a security perspective. That is something that can be improved upon. Palo Alto already has implemented this as a pilot passed processing. So they put the same stream of data across multiple modules at the same time and see if it is giving a positive result by using an XR function. So, something similar can be done in the Cisco Firepower. Instead of single processing or in a sequential manner, they can do something similar to pile processing. Internal function that is something that they can improve upon.
I would like to see real-time logging in the next release.
One feature lacking is superior anti-virus protection, which must be added.
The security features in the URL category need more improvement.
Cisco should redo their website so it's actually usable in a faster way.
The stability and the product features have to really be worked on.
I would like for them to develop better integration with other security platforms.
The license system is also good but it's not very impressive. It's a very regular licensing system. They call it a smart license which means that your device will connect to the internet. This is a little bit of a headache for some customers. It doesn't make the customer happy because most of the customers prefer not to connect their firewall or system to the internet.
It can definitely improve on the performance.
It has to be more scalable for the deployment of VMs on the cloud.
I would like to see a more thorough QA process. We have had some difficulties from bugs in releases.
We have ran into issues with Palo Alto’s limitations for resolving large IP lists from DNS lookups, as well as the antivirus interfering with App-ID.
The product could provide protection above Layer 3, which gets into the application layer and provides better visibility into those aspects of application security.
On the cloud side, they need to come up with more HA solutions to support the multi-region.
AWS doesn't integrate well with third-party firewalls.
I would like a way to do everything programmatically, or be able to copy the configs from different prices at different levels.
Pricing and Cost Advice
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.
The cost is a bit higher than other competitive solutions on the market.
We normally license on a yearly basis. The hardware procurement cost should be considered. If you're virtual maybe that cost is eradicated and just the licensing cost is applied. If you have hardware the cost must be covered by you. All the shipping charges will be paid by you also. I don't thing there are any other hidden charges though.
If you want the full-featured services then it will cost approximately $15,000 per year.
The Cisco licensing agreement in Bangladesh is different than the one in India and in Dubai. It is not a problem, but if you want to subscribe to the yearly subscription, the original cost is really high. Also, if you go for an anti-virus, you pay for an additional yearly subscription.
It's more expensive than Fortinet and Juniper. The price is high compared to other vendors. In general, for the license, it's not that expensive.
Based on the services that you will get, especially the AMP license, the price is very reasonable.
We pay a lot of money for it.
It is a great solution for medium or big enterprises, not so much for small businesses, mainly due to the financial costs.
Cisco Firepower is a great solution, but it is expensive compared to others that can provide similar benefits for much less.
The pricing and licensing of this product on AWS should be from $1.28/hr or $4,500.00/yr. Then, it would be a good price for the performance that it delivers.
We used BYOL, because of the cost to own.
The pricing and licensing of this product on AWS for a three-year commitment is a great deal, if you can plan that far ahead.
Because the solution was getting deployed on AWS, it was the best place to go and it was available there.
One of the factors for selecting Palo Alto was they had flexible pricing. They had a pay-as-you-go model. Comparable to other products, such as Check Point, the price point was definitely a plus.
The pricing was expensive but it was comparable to the competition.
AWS is available as a AMI that you can purchase from the AWS Marketplace. Therefore, you need to purchase the licensing, since it is per AMI. Then, you deploy it on a regular EC2. Then, for on-premise, you can use both Palo Alto's software and hardware.
The price is not bad. They have a yearly renewal fee, and the pricing is exactly where we expect it to be.
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 28% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA||Cisco Firepower Next-Generation Firewall, FirePOWER|
|Cisco||Cisco||Palo Alto Networks|
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.
The Cisco Firepower Next Generation Firewall (NGFW) prevents breaches, and can quickly detect and mitigate stealthy attacks using deep visibility and the most advanced security capabilities of any firewall available today - all while maintaining optimal network performance and uptime. With Cisco NGFW you can automate operations to save time, reduce complexity, and work smarter.
The VM-Series is a virtualized form factor of our next-generation firewall that can be deployed in a range of private and public cloud computing environments based on technologies from VMware, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, Citrix and KVM.
The VM-Series natively analyzes all traffic in a single pass to determine the application identity, the content within, and the user identity. These core elements of your business can then be used as integral components of your security policy, enabling you to improve your security efficacy through a positive control model and reduce your incident response time though complete visibility into applications across all ports.
In both private and public cloud environments, the VM-Series can be deployed as a perimeter gateway, an IPsec VPN termination point, and a segmentation gateway, protecting your workloads with application enablement and threat prevention policies.
Start your two week free trial.
Learn more about Cisco Firepower NGFW
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series
|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.||Rackspace, The French Laundry, Downer Group, Lewisville School District, Shawnee Mission School District, Lower Austria Firefighters Administration, Oxford Hospital, SugarCreek, Westfield||Warren Rogers Associates|
Financial Services Firm19%
Comms Service Provider11%
Comms Service Provider22%
Financial Services Firm14%
Comms Service Provider29%
Financial Services Firm29%
Comms Service Provider25%
Financial Services Firm18%
No Data Available