We performed a comparison between Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is rather easy to use."
"Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
"In general, the features are all great. However, if I need to take hardware for ASA, because they need to upgrade to Firepower, we want to create rules. For that, most of the time we go to the command line. Right now Firepower is working really hard on the grid. You can apply all those rules to the grid. Even if you want to monitor the logs, for example, the activity will tell you which particular user has been blocked because of that rule. Firepower's monitoring interface is very good, because you can see each and every piece. ASA also had it, but there you needed to type the command and be under the server to see all that stuff. In Firepower you have the possibility to go directly to the firewall. The way the monitoring is displayed is also very nice. The feature I appreciate most in Firepower is actually the grid. The grid has worked very well."
"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is easy to configure and the reporting is great. It's also very user-friendly."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."
"The whole solution is very good, and stable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"I like most of Cisco's features, like malware detection and URL filtering."
"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."
"With the IP address flag, I was able to see that I was being hacked. The moment there was an interaction between somebody on my network and that IP, the solution was able to flag it, and we were able to protect ourselves."
"The sandboxing tools offer great prevention for cloud feeds."
"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly, has interesting features, URL filtering, and threat prevention."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Threat Prevention for our company is the next generation firewall."
"It's a monster, it's got so many beautiful features. We do deal with other firewalls and we've got a better idea of what other firewalls' capabilities are, any comparison with the Palo Alto I liked the quality of service on the applications that you can control the amount of bandwidth an application is allowed to consume. The best feature is the quality of the application quality of service."
"The stability of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is good."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
"The cloud can be improved."
"I did not experience any pain points that required improvement. Maybe a couple of false-positives, but that's about it."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"Performance needs improvement."
"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."
"While the alerts they offer are good, it could improve it in the sense that they should be more detailed to make the alerts more useful to us in general. Sometimes the solution will offer up false positives. Due to the fact that the alerts aren't detailed, we have to go dig around to see why is it being blocked. The solution would be infinitely better if there was just a bit more detail in the alert information and logging we receive."
"Integration with other components — even Cisco's own products — can be enhanced to improve administrative experience."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"Right now we are focusing on email. If Palo Alto can increase the features related to email filtering and the new malware, it would help us protect our systems."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve the commercial offing. Other solutions, such as Fortinet provide better commercial features."
"The price of licenses should be lowered to make it less costly to scale our solution."
"It's not so easy to set up a test environment, because it's not so easy to get the test license. The vendor only gives you 90 days for a test license; it's a tough license to get."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the only thing I don't like is the support."
"I think they can use some improvement on FID."
"Mission learning techniques should continue to expand and detect unknown threats on the fly."
More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 15th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 17 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is ranked 6th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 24 reviews. Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "The solution provides visibility across virtual environments, protects internal networks, and is scalable to meet organizational needs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention writes "A good amount of granularity and advanced URL filtering capabilities". Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Darktrace and Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, whereas Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is most compared with Check Point IPS, Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Arista NDR, Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Trellix Intrusion Prevention System. See our Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.