We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The IPS, as well as the malware features, are the two things that we use the most and they're very valuable."
"The protection and security features, like URL filtering, the inspection, and the IPS feature, are also very valuable for us. We don't have IT staff at most of the sites so for us it's important to have a robust firewall at those sites"
"We can easily track unauthorized users and see where traffic is going."
"With the FMC and the FirePOWERs, the ability to quickly replace a piece of hardware without having to have a network outage is useful. Also, the ability to replace a piece of equipment and deploy the config that the previous piece of equipment had is pretty useful."
"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."
"The Firepower+ISE+AMP for endpoint integration is something that really stands it out with other vendor solutions. They have something called pxGrid and i think it is already endorsed by IETF. This allows all devices on the network to communicate."
"Being able to determine our active users vs inactive users has led us to increased productivity through visibility. Also, if an issue was happening with our throughput, then we wouldn't know without research. Now, notifications are more proactively happening."
"One of the most valuable features is the AMP. It's very good and very reliable when it comes to malicious activities, websites, and viruses."
"The hardware is pretty stable. It's also a very good product performance-wise. Initially, it wasn't mature like a firewall and there were other leaders, but now they have included almost all the features of next-generation security. Basically, it's a good product to work with."
"Cisco has always been a premium product. There's a lot of other entry-level solutions. This is more robust."
"Completely integrates branch offices with perimeter security."
"The capabilities for scalability with this product are huge"
"Cisco is head-and-shoulders above all of the competition when it comes to technical support."
"We are able to filter a lot of traffic especially when a lot of the traffic is in layer 7."
"It covers everything we need it to without looking to secondary solutions."
"What I have used the most and received the most benefit from is the IPsec technology."
"It helped us with its routing capabilities which eased the cost, because otherwise I would have had to take a router and firewall, and then integrate it. With this, however, it was an integration of firewall and routing services all together in a single product. That was one thing that I loved about it."
"The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control."
"Performance is a strong point."
"Juniper is one of the most powerful network security solutions while remaining simple to use, set up, and scale."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"Technical support is perfect."
"The solution has been good for fulfilling our basic needs."
"Troubleshooting with the solution is quite easy. If you compare the process to, for example, Fortigate, Juniper is much easier."
"For the new line of FTDs, the performance could be improved. We sometimes have issues with the 41 series, depending what we activate. If we activate too many intrusion policies, it affects the CPU."
"The user interface for the Firepower management console is a little bit different from traditional Cisco management tools. If you look at products we already use, like Cisco Prime or other products that are cloud-based, they have a more modern user interface for managing the products. For Firepower, the user interface is not very user-friendly. It's a little bit confusing sometimes."
"We would like to see improvement in recovery. If there is an issue that forces us to do recovery, we have to restart or reboot. In addition, sometimes we have downtime during the maintenance windows. If Cisco could enhance this, so that upgrades would not necessarily require downtime, that would be helpful."
"We had an event recently where we had inbound traffic for SIP and we experienced an attack against our SIP endpoint, such that they were able to successfully make calls out... Both CTR, which is gathering data from multiple solutions that the vendor provides, as well as the FMC events connection, did not show any of those connections because there was not a NAT inbound which said either allow it or deny it."
"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."
"The product line does not address the SMB market as it is supposed to do. Cisco already has an on-premises sandbox solution."
"The central management tool is not comfortable to use. You need to have a specific skill set. This is an important improvement for management because I would like to log into Firepower, see the dashboard, and generate a real-time report, then I question my team."
"One feature I would like to see, that Firepower doesn't have, is email security. Perhaps in the future, Cisco will integrate Cisco Umbrella with Firepower. I don't see why we should have to pay for two separate products when both could be integrated in one box."
"I would love it if it has a link-by-link feature, integration with Unified Threat Management (UTM), and load balancers. They haven't got any link-by-link feature right now, which can be a very attractive option. This link-by-link feature can also be made available for Cisco's UTM firewalls. The link-by-link feature is available in some of the other firewalls. Currently, integration with UTM is missing. Cisco IOS Security also doesn't have the load balancers and a few things that need to be done to get a good UTM firewall. Normally, other firewalls have UTM. As a next-generation firewall, it's good, but as a UTM, it has to do some work."
"The company needs to make its solution more affordable to make it more accessible to larger markets. Otherwise, it's seen as an enterprise-level solution that small or medium-sized organizations can't afford and therefore they won't even look at it."
"The pricing is the only con for this product."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"Signatures and other critical definitions need to be updated more frequently."
"With respect to user-friendliness, it is a command-line interface and those with such experience will get along just fine, whereas others may struggle."
"It would be ideal if the solution had more capacity."
"The configuration should be easier in the solution."
"IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated."
"It should be easier to escalate support tickets."
"There are a lot of features that customers do not know about and I think that better documentation would help when it comes to learning how to use the product."
"It could have features that other products support like blade options and stand-alone endpoint security."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
"The user interface and the GUI need improvement."
"The solution isn't very granular or detailed."
"While the GUI is pretty good on the Juniper side, there can still be tweaks made to it that will make it even better."
"Cisco's pricing is high, at times, for what they provide."
"The one-time cost is affordable, but the maintenance cost and the Smart Net costs need to be reduced. They're too high."
"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."
"Cisco pricing is premium. However, they gave us a 50 to 60 percent discount."
"There are additional implementation and validation costs."
"Cisco, as we all know, is expensive, but for the money you are paying, you know that you are also getting top-notch documentation as well as support if needed."
"This product requires licenses for advanced features including Snort, IPS, and malware detection."
"This product is expensive."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The pricing is okay. It is competitive. It costs more when you need get more features."
"Price is certainly something that the IOS technology has fallen behind the competition on."
"It is necessary to pay for a license in order to use the solution. It is on a yearly basis and the price is high."
"Palo Alto networks are more expensive than this solution and this is why you will see more products like this one in Mexico."
"The price of the solution should be cheaper, and the license is purchase annually."
"There was no additional licensing cost because there were no IPS services. It was just a firewall IP circuit router so they have the default licensing. We just need to renew the support yearly."
"Compared to other vendors, the pricing of this solution is good."
"The product itself is costly and the price of migration is very high."
"This is an expensive product."
"The price is reasonable."
"The price could improve, it is a bit expensive."
"Its price is reasonable. In India, most of the products have a similar price. There is only a 5% to 10% variation in the price of different brands."
"There is a licensing fee."
Cisco NGFW firewalls deliver advanced threat defense capabilities to meet diverse needs, from
small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide
range of models, Cisco NGFW can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Advanced threat
defense capabilities include Next-generation IPS (NGIPS), Security Intelligence (SI), Advanced
Malware Protection (AMP), URL filtering, Application Visibility and Control (AVC), and flexible VPN
features. Inspect encrypted traffic and enjoy automated risk ranking and impact flags to reduce event
volume so you can quickly prioritize threats. Cisco NGFW firewalls are also available with clustering
for increased performance, high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco Firepower NGFWv is the virtualized version of Cisco's Firepower NGFW firewall. Widely
deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco NGFWv automatically scales up/down to meet
the needs of dynamic cloud environments and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco NGFWv
can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your
environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is
delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco
SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables
greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 17th in Firewalls with 10 reviews while Juniper SRX is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 31 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 7.8, while Juniper SRX is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "Prevent unauthorized use of network resources and integrate branch offices with reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX writes "This best in class Next-Gen firewall is elegant in its ease-of-use and architecture". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Zyxel Unified Security Gateway, Fortinet FortiGate, pfSense, Cisco ASA Firewall and OPNsense, whereas Juniper SRX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, pfSense and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. Juniper SRX 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.