We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Sangfor NGAF 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."The SD-WAN is the most valuable feature."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"The features that prevent internet connections, the filtering are the most valuable because we did not have any internet protection before."
"One of the nice things about FortiGate is that it can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises. You can actually do both. That's the biggest reason why I stick with this solution as opposed to something like Cisco Meraki. Another nice thing is that I can log directly into a FortiGate or get to it through their FortiCloud access products. They're pretty reliable and consistent. One of the reasons why I started using the product was their single pane of management. I can deploy their line of firewalls in conjunction with their switching and access points, and I can manage the entire network from one interface. I don't have to log into one interface for the firewall, another one for the access points, and another one for the switches. These firewalls have access point controller functionality built right into the system, so I don't even have to purchase additional devices to manage them."
"The user interface is relatively easy. The devices are easy to deploy and figure out when you have experience with other security appliances."
"Secure, user-friendly, stable, and scalable network security solution. Installation is straightforward."
"Its administrative panel is very intuitive and simple. It is simpler than the other solutions that we had. As an administrator, we are always looking for the easiest solution to manage network policies. We are able to filter everything on our network and also use the VPN feature, which is important these days when people are working remotely during COVID."
"It has very easy management and an amazing ETM configuration."
"It's very stable and mature."
"Valuable features include AnyConnect, double translations, and an independent IPS module."
"The Adversity Malware Protection (AMP) feature is the most valuable. It is also very easy to use. Every technical user can operate this solution without any difficulty. The dashboard of Cisco Firepower has every tool that a security operator needs. You can find every resource that you need to operate through this dashboard."
"If we look at the Cisco ASA without Firepower, then one of the most valuable features is the URL filtering."
"The technical team is always available when we have problems."
"The most valuable features are the IPsec VPN and web filtering."
"Ease of configuration: It has gotten a lot easier to configure compared to the original Cisco Pix."
"One of the best features is the ease of use. It's also easy to teach new engineers to use the ASA CLI."
"Sangfor NGAF's standout feature is its powerful application control, enabling precise restrictions on mobile user access to approved applications."
"Sangfor is a good solution that provides a WAF and firewall solution. Most other vendors, like Sophos and Fortinet and Cisco, only provide one solution. That's a valuable feature of Sangfor."
"In terms of the most valuable features, the IPS report is quick and updated. Performance is also valuable."
"Sangfor has the best capabilities for securing connections, securing web browsers, securing servers, and general threat protection."
"The built-in features function as intended, providing exceptional value."
"The most valuable features are the WAN optimization, the internet access gateway (IAG), and the central console, which allows us to implement on their firewall."
"You might try Sangfor if you are on a tight budget. The price is affordable, and Sangfor offers a lot of features. We don't have any complaints about Sangfor."
"The price versus value is good because the solution is less expensive than Sophos, Fortinet, or SonicWall."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"Lacks training for new features."
"I'm not sure if it's something that they already have or are developing something, however, we need some dedicated features for container security."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"The inclusion of an autofill feature would improve the ease of commands."
"The solution has not had any layer upgrades. It does not have layer five and upwards, it only has up to layer four. This has caused some problems for us."
"They need to do an overhaul of the management console."
"The graphical interface could be improved. From what I have seen, Fortinet, for example, has a nicer GUI."
"Integration aspects and traffic shaping need improvement."
"One of my colleagues is using the firewall as an IPS, but he is worried about Firepower's performance... With the 10 Gb devices, when it gets to 5 Gbps, the CPU usage goes up a lot and he cannot manage the IPS."
"We have encountered problems when implementing new signatures and new versions on our firewall. Sometimes, there is a short outage of our services, and we have not been able to understand what's going on. This is an area for improvement, and it would be good to have a way to monitor and understand why there is an outage."
"A feature that would allow me to load balance among multiple ISPs, especially since we have deployed it as a perimeter firewall, would be a great addition."
"Sangfor has recently increased their prices."
"The interface and user experience are horrible."
"The firewall system needs gradual improvements because there are more threats and challenges every day."
"An area of improvement for Sangfor NGAF could be in the field of reporting and logging."
"I believe that IAM and NGFW need to merge into a single box, instead of there being two separate box solutions."
"The tool is expensive."
"An area for improvement would be the number of ports defined on the box. In the next release, I would like them to develop their provisioning stage of enrolling end devices."
"The solution should be able to work in a hybrid setup."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 31 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0. 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 Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and H3C SecPath Firewalls. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Sangfor NGAF 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.
