Compare Comodo Dome Firewall vs. Palo Alto NG Firewalls

Comodo Dome Firewall is ranked 33rd in Firewalls with 1 review while Palo Alto NG Firewalls is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 18 reviews. Comodo Dome Firewall is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto NG Firewalls is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Comodo Dome Firewall writes "User-Friendly, improves security, and gives me more control over my VoIP". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto NG Firewalls writes "Great at threat prevention and has good policy-based routing features". Comodo Dome Firewall is most compared with pfSense, Sophos UTM and Sophos XG, whereas Palo Alto NG Firewalls is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG and pfSense.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Jonny Su
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, pfSense, Cisco and others in Firewalls. Updated: November 2019.
378,809 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
For us, the most valuable features are the IPX and the Sourcefire Defense Center module. That gives us visibility into the traffic coming in and going out, and gives us the heads-up if there is a potential outbreak or potential malicious user who is trying to access the site. It also helps us see traffic generated by an end device trying to reach out to the world.The information coming from Talos does a good job... I like the fact that Cisco is working with them and getting the information from them and updating the firewall.The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic.Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.The most important point is the detection engine which is now part of the next-generation firewalls and which is supported by Cisco Talos.The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides.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.

Read more »

This solution is user-friendly.

Read more »

This solution not only provides better security than flat VLAN segments but allows easy movement through the lifecycle of the server.The initial setup was very easy.The most valuable features are the threat prevention and policy-based routing features.We have found the application control to be the most valuable feature. Also, Layer 7, because all other products are working up to the maximum capacity. But Palo Alto is benefiting us, especially in application control management. We are able to differentiate between Oracle traffic and SQL traffic.The solution is scalableI found Palo Alto NG firewalls more intuitive compared to other products. I value the capability to identify a cloud solution.Comments have some delay, but overall, it's a good product.With our High availability pair, we have had no downtime for several years, since it was first put it in production.

Read more »

Cons
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.Our latest experience with a code upgrade included a number of bugs and issues that we ran into. So more testing with their code, before it hits us, would help.The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed.In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products.There was an error in the configuration, related to our uplink switches, that caused us to contact technical support, and it took a very long time to resolve the issue.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.

Read more »

I haven't seen any feature that will allow me direct authentication for a VPN solution.

Read more »

I wish that the Palos had better system logging for the hardware itself.The advanced manual protection needs to be improved a little bit because they used to make a cloud manual analysis for the cloud.I think they need to have a proper hardware version for a smaller enterprise. We had to go to a very high-end version which is very expensive. If we chose the lower-end version, it would not meet our goals. A middle-end is missing in its portfolio.The solution needs some management tool enhancements. It could also use more reporting tools.The support could be improved.The scalability compared to other products is not good. You need to change the box whenever you want your number of connection sessions to increase.We need better affiliations for profiling the user.When you delete and add a new rule, because of the one hundred rule limit, if the new rule has an ID that is greater than one hundred, even though you have fewer than that, it will not work.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Pricing varies on the model and the features we are using. It could be anywhere from $600 to $1000 to up to $7,000 per year, depending on what model and what feature sets are available to us.We used Check Point and the two are comparable. Cost was really what put us onto the ASAs... the price tag for Check Point was exorbitantly more than what it is for the ASA solution.Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.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.

Read more »

Information Not Available
The licensing is annual, and there aren't any additional fees on top of that.Don't buy a device with more power than you really need, because licensing depends on the cost of the box you have.It will be worth your time to hire a contractor to set it up and configure it for you, especially if you are not very knowledgeable with PA firewalls.Pricing is yearly, but it depends. You could pay on a yearly basis, or every three years. If you want to add a device or two, there would be an additional cost. Also, if you want to do an assessment, or other similar add-on, you have to pay accordingly for the additional service.Annually, the licensing costs are too much.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
378,809 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 39% of the time.
Compared 42% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASADome Firewall Palo Alto NGFW, Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall, Palo Alto Networks PA-Series
Learn
Cisco
Comodo
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

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.

Maintaining day-to-day operations - and growing your business - requires network traffic to constantly flow into and out of your internal network. A lot of that traffic is trusted. But much of it isn't, and you need to be able to distinguish between the two. Comodo Dome Firewall is a unified threat management system that helps to secure all ports and protocols and delivers a host of security controls.

Palo Alto Networks' next-generation firewalls secure your business with a prevention-focused architecture and integrated innovations that are easy to deploy and use. Now, you can accelerate growth and eliminate risks at the same time.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Comodo Dome Firewall
Learn more about Palo Alto NG Firewalls
Sample Customers
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.
Information Not Available
SkiStar AB, Ada County, Global IT Services PSF, Southern Cross Hospitals, Verge Health, University of Portsmouth, Austrian Airlines, The Heinz Endowments
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider11%
Manufacturing Company11%
University8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider16%
Media Company8%
Retailer5%
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider11%
Construction Company9%
Retailer9%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise39%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise44%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business52%
Midsize Enterprise26%
Large Enterprise22%
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, pfSense, Cisco and others in Firewalls. Updated: November 2019.
378,809 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email