We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"Another benefit has been user integration. We try to integrate our policies so that we can create policies based on active users. We can create policies based on who is accessing a resource instead of just IP addresses and ports."
"It has a good security level. It is a next-generation firewall. It can protect from different types of attacks. We have enabled IPS and IDS."
"The most valuable features of this solution are advanced malware protection, IPS, and IDS."
"You do not have to do everything through a command line which makes it a lot easier to apply rules."
"The most valuable feature is the access control list (ACL)."
"If you compare the ASA and the FirePOWER, the best feature with FirePOWER is easy to use GUI. It has most of the same functionality in the Next-Generation FirePOWER, such as IPS, IPS policies, security intelligence, and integration and identification of all the devices or hardware you have in your network. Additionally, this solution is user-friendly."
"We get the Security Intelligence Feeds refreshed every hour from Talos, which from my understanding is that they're the largest intelligence Security Intelligence Group outside of the government."
"It's a relatively simple product that is easy to use. It's not overly complex."
"This product is affordable and it's a good, high-performance appliance."
"The performance overall is very good."
"The most valuable feature is that its IPsec works perfectly."
"The standard features, including the filtering, are quite good. All the basic features are pretty useful for us."
"The technical support is very good."
"The support is good. We don't have any issues with the technical support."
"Fortinet-VM is more scalable than the hardware version. If you're using an appliance, there are limitations in terms of hardware specs. So if you want a more scalable firewall, you can get a VM and install it on a high-end server."
"I'm told the solution is the fastest, and, so far, I do find that to be the case."
"The architecture of the OS in Juniper is very good. It's flexibility, scalability, and the technicality is also good."
"It's a very powerful solution and the firewalls offer high performance"
"The initial setup is pretty simple."
"It is deployed on the customer site, and we manage the firewalls on this side."
"The dashboard, customization, API, and pricing are good."
"Juniper is more flexible with the commit check and the commit confirmed command. The design of the forwarding and contract plan in the operating system is very important for the performance when we have very big traffic."
"The solution could offer better control that would allow the ability to restrictions certain features from a website."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex for those unfamiliar with the solution."
"Its interface is sometimes is a little bit slow, and it can be improved. When you need to put your appliance in failover mode, it is a little difficult to do it remotely because you need to turn off the appliance in Cisco mode. In terms of new features, it would be good to have AnyConnect VPN with Firepower. I am not sure if it is available at the moment."
"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."
"Implementations require the use of a console. It would help if the console was embedded."
"In a future release, it would be ideal if they could offer an open interface to other security products so that we could easily connect to our own open industry standard."
"The Firepower FTD code is missing some old ASA firewalls codes. It's a small thing. But Firepower software isn't missing things that are essential, anymore."
"The price and SD-WAN capabilities are the areas that need improvement."
"The solution should provide more useful GUI features."
"The product does not have a good graphical interface."
"It would be better if it could provide you with options before completely blocking anything through the web filter. If you are doing a deep SSL inspection on the site if it says it's expired, it doesn't give you the option to continue at your own risk. I can't say that it's bad, but SSL internally isn't really a requirement. However, its security features can help. Right now, we have people going out and spending on purchasing the SSL certificates for internal sites."
"In the next release, we would like to see full integration with VMware NSX virtualized networks."
"There should be a bit more automation."
"FortiGate should be more customer friendly and budgeted better."
"It needs an Application Inspection."
"Customization needs improvement."
"It could use more tutorials."
"Some people complain that the solution tends to have a steep learning curve. It could be because most people have basic familiarity with Cisco or other similar products and maybe have never worked closely with Juniper products."
"We worked with Cisco's support and Juniper's support and there are some differences, to be honest, Cisco is more available and is more competent at addressing our cases."
"I would like to see an activity sensor for malicious content or sensor for viruses and malware."
"VPN access is an area that needs improvement."
"We experienced some technical issues during implementation"
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to the GUI because it isn't very good."
"For me, personally, as an individual, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is expensive."
"This solution is expensive and other solutions, such as FortiGate, are cheaper."
"There are additional implementation and validation costs."
"Its pricing is good and competitive. There is a maintenance cost. It includes SecureX that makes it cost-effective as compared to the other solutions where you have to pay for XDR and SOAR capabilities."
"Cisco is not for a small mom-and-pop shop because of the cost, but if you're in a regulated industry where a breach could cost you a million dollars, it's a bargain."
"When we purchased the firewall, we had to take the security license for IPS, malware protection, and VPN. If we are using high availability, we have to take a license for that. We also have to pay for hardware support and technical support. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"I like the Smart Licensing, because it is more dynamic and easier to keep track of where you are at. If we have a high availability firewall pair and they are deployed in active/standby rather than active/active, I would expect that we would only pay for one set of licenses because you are using only one firewall at any one time. The other is there just for resiliency. The licensing, from a Firepower perspective, still requires you to have two licenses, even if the firewalls are in active/standby, which means that you pay for the two licenses, even though you might only be using one firewall any one time. This is probably not the best way to do it and doesn't represent the best value for money. This could be looked at to see if it could be done in a fairer way."
"I am happy with the product in general, including the pricing."
"The price is similar to Symantec Endpoint, but it's more expensive than Forcepoint solutions. Fortinet is better than Forcepoint."
"With Fortinet FortiGate-VM you can bring your own licensing, or it can be paid on a yearly basis."
"We are on an annual license for this solution and it could be cheaper."
"The price of this product is great compared to others."
"There is an annual license required to use the solution."
"There is a support fee that can be bought on a yearly or two-yearly basis. I don't think they do five years. The best benefit is that the same pricing is guaranteed for that duration. If you can afford it, I would recommend using the longest possible time span."
"The cost of this product is too high."
"The customer must buy his own license."
"As a customer, the pricing is good for us."
"After some research, I think that the cost of Juniper is more than Check Point, Palo Alto, and Fortinet."
"The pricing is reasonable."
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.
FortiGate Virtual Appliances allow you to mitigate blind spots by implementing critical security controls within your virtual infrastructure. They also allow you to rapidly provision security infrastructure whenever and wherever it is needed. FortiGate virtual appliances feature all of the security and networking services common to traditional hardware-based FortiGate appliances. With the addition of virtual appliances from Fortinet, you can deploy a mix of hardware and virtual appliances, operating together and managed from a common centralized management platform.
Fortinet FortiGate-VM is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 54 reviews while Juniper vSRX is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 7 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate-VM is rated 8.2, while Juniper vSRX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate-VM writes "Slightly unstable, needs a better user interface, and lacks good monitoring capabilities ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". Fortinet FortiGate-VM is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, OPNsense and Meraki MX, whereas Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX, pfSense, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, Azure Firewall and OPNsense. See our Fortinet FortiGate-VM vs. Juniper vSRX 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.