Compare Juniper SRX vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Shashidhara B N
Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper SRX vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,208 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
Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.The traffic inspection and the Firepower engine are the most valuable features. It gives you full details, application details, traffic monitoring, and the threats. It gives you all the containers the user is using, especially at the application level. The solution also provides application visibility and control.If we look at the Cisco ASA without Firepower, then one of the most valuable features is the URL filtering.It's easy to integrate ASA with other Cisco security products. When you understand the technology, it's not a big deal. It's very simple.The benefits we see from the ASA are connected to teleworking as well as, of course, having the basic functionality of a firewall in place and the prevention of attacks.On the network side, where you create your rules for allowing traffic — what can come inside and what can go out — that works perfectly, if you know what you want to achieve. It protects you.If you have a solution that is creating a script and you need to deploy many implementations, you can create a script in the device and it will be the same for all. After that, you just have to do the fine tuning.They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality.

More Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall Pros »

Juniper is one of the most powerful network security solutions while remaining simple to use, set up, and scale.The most valuable feature is the licensing scheme for security functions.Performance is a strong point.The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control.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.I like the routing and firewall features.The solution's stability is very good.I've found the security features, such as IDS and the VPN most valuable.

More Juniper SRX Pros »

The most valuable feature is that you can control your traffic flowing out and coming it, allowing you to apply malware and threat protection, as well as vulnerability checks.The most valuable feature is the Posture Assessment.In Palo Alto the most important feature is the App-ID.The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS.The interface with Panorama makes it very easy to use.The most valuable features are security and support.The most valuable aspects of this solution are that it's simple and stable. It has better security aspects compared to other similar solutions.Embedding it into my application development lifecycle prevents data loss and business disruption, allowing the adoption to operate at the speed of my AWS Cloud.

More Palo Alto Networks VM-Series Pros »

Cons
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.Security generally requires integration with many devices, and the management side of that process could be enhanced somewhat. It would help if there was a clear view of the integrations and what the easiest way to do them is.One area where the ASA could be improved is that it doesn't have AMP. When you get an ASA with the Firepower model, ASA with FTD, then you have advanced malware protection.If I want to activate IPS features on it, I have to buy another license. If I want Cisco AnyConnect, I have to buy another license. That's where we have challenges.Cisco missed the mark with all the configuration steps. They are a pain and, when doing them, it looks as if we're using a very old technology — yet the technology itself is not old, it's very good. But the front-end configuration is very tough.Cisco provides us with application visibility and control, although it's not a complete solution compared to other vendors. Cisco needs to work on the application behavior side of things, in particular when it comes to the behavior of SSL traffic.It is expensive.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.

More Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall Cons »

It could have features that other products support like blade options and stand-alone endpoint security.In the next release, I would like to see the remote access client improved as well as improvements made to the administration GUI.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 should be easier to escalate support tickets.IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated.The workplace management console needs improvement. It should be a little bit more developed. Also, the interface needs a bit more improvement.The big thing is performance. With all the features turned on it slows down.In terms of other features, I'd like to see a web filter, 10 point control, application control and a DNA filter in the next release.

More Juniper SRX Cons »

The disadvantage with Palo Alto is that they don't have a cloud-based solution that includes a secure web gateway.In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the endpoints and the firewalls.The solution needs to have more easily searchable details or documentation about it online, so it's easier to Google if you have queries.I would like to have automatic daily reporting, such as how many users have connected via SSL VPN.The command-line interface is something that some people struggle with and I think that they should have an option to go straight to the GUI.There should be an option for direct integration with the Azure platform.In the next release, I would like for them to develop an anti-malware functionality in which it checks for malicious files like Cisco has.It can definitely improve on the performance.

More Palo Alto Networks VM-Series Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.There is room for improvement in the pricing when compared to the market. Although, when you compare the benefits of support from Cisco, you can adjust the value and it becomes comparable, because you usually need very good support. So you gain value there with this device.When it comes to Cisco, the price of everything is higher. Cisco firewalls are expensive, but we get support from Cisco, and that support is very active.It's a brilliant firewall, and the fact that it comes with a perpetual license really does go far in terms of helping the organization in not having to deal with those costs on an annual basis. That is a pain point when it comes to services like the ones we have on Fortigate. That's where we really give Cisco firewalls the thumbs up.Cisco is expensive, but you do get benefits for the price.In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.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.

More Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

Compared to other vendors, the pricing of this solution is good.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.The price of this solution is more than other products, but it's stable, and the technical support is better than I have seen with others.While the price of support is expensive, the price of the solution, itself, is not.The pricing is perhaps half, probably forty percent, of Cisco.The direct support with Juniper is expensive. When you stop using the solution and miss one year of payments, if you want the support back on a specific node, they ask you to pay for the year that you haven't used the node.In terms of pricing, Juniper is in the middle. The most expensive firewall is Palo Alto. If a customer wants the cheapest price they should go for FortiGate. Juniper is in between these products.

More Juniper SRX Pricing and Cost Advice »

The price of this solution is very high for some parts of Africa, which makes it a challenge.The pricing and licensing of this product on AWS should be from $1.28/hr or $4,500.00/yr. Then, it would be a good price for the performance that it delivers.We used BYOL, because of the cost to own.The pricing and licensing of this product on AWS for a three-year commitment is a great deal, if you can plan that far ahead.Because the solution was getting deployed on AWS, it was the best place to go and it was available there.One of the factors for selecting Palo Alto was they had flexible pricing. They had a pay-as-you-go model. Comparable to other products, such as Check Point, the price point was definitely a plus.The pricing was expensive but it was comparable to the competition.AWS is available as a AMI that you can purchase from the AWS Marketplace. Therefore, you need to purchase the licensing, since it is per AMI. Then, you deploy it on a regular EC2. Then, for on-premise, you can use both Palo Alto's software and hardware.

More Palo Alto Networks VM-Series Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
437,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Fortinet FGs: Great devices, relatively easy to deploy and maintain. Cheaper than most devices of their kind. If you're looking for a lot of features at a relatively low price point this is the way to… more »
Top Answer: They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality.
Top Answer: In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.
Top Answer: The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control.
Top Answer: When we first tested the serial interface on our model, it did not work. It should be easier to escalate support tickets.
Top Answer: We use Juniper for EEE routing and we also use the gateway feature.
Top Answer: You can choose Palo Alto as one of the best security product lines. For a hybrid network use central management to get a consolidated view of the security status.
Top Answer: The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS.
Top Answer: The price of this solution is very high for some parts of Africa, which makes it a challenge. If it were lowered then it would be more popular.
Popular Comparisons
Compared 34% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire FirewallsSRX
Learn
Cisco
Juniper
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

Cisco ASA firewalls deliver enterprise-class firewall functionality with highly scalable and flexible VPN 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 ASA can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Flexible VPN capabilities include support for remote access, site-to-site, and clientless VPN. Also, select appliances support clustering for increased performance, VPN load balancing to optimize available resources, advanced high availability configurations, and more.

Cisco ASAv is the virtualized version of the Cisco ASA firewall. Widely deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco ASAv is ideal for remote worker and multi-tenant environments. The solution scales up/down to meet performance requirements and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco ASAv 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.

High-performance security with advanced, integrated threat intelligence, delivered on the industry's most scalable and resilient platform. SRX Series gateways set new benchmarks with 100GbE interfaces and feature Express Path technology, which enables up to 1 Tbps performance for the data center.

The VM-Series is a virtualized form factor of our next-generation firewall that can be deployed in a range of private and public cloud computing environments based on technologies from VMware, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, Citrix and KVM.

The VM-Series natively analyzes all traffic in a single pass to determine the application identity, the content within, and the user identity. These core elements of your business can then be used as integral components of your security policy, enabling you to improve your security efficacy through a positive control model and reduce your incident response time though complete visibility into applications across all ports.

In both private and public cloud environments, the VM-Series can be deployed as a perimeter gateway, an IPsec VPN termination point, and a segmentation gateway, protecting your workloads with application enablement and threat prevention policies.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall
Learn more about Juniper SRX
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series
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.7-Eleven, AARNet Pty Ltd, Allegro Networks, alltours GmbH, Apollo Hotel Papendrecht, Armstrong Atlantic State University, Atlantech Online, Availity, Bajaj Capital, Baloise Insurance, BancABC, BAS Group, Black Lotus, Blue Box, Borealis, Carilion Clinic, Catholic Health System, CATV, Champlain College, Chinas Ministry of Railways, China University of Mining and Technology (CUMT), Cloud Dynamics, CloudSeeds, Cloudwatt, CODONiS, Colt Technology Services, Cork Internet Exchange, CSS Versicherung AG, CyrusOne, Danish Crown, Deloitte Belgium, Department of Energy, Divona Telecom, DQE Communications, DreamHost, European Government Agency, Expedient, Financial Market Information Services Provider, Fluidata, Fonality, Fox Sports, Global Financial Institution, Global Investment Bank, Global Investment Company, Energy Sciences Network (ESnet), Goethe University, HEAnet, High Performance Networks Inc., HillenbrandWarren Rogers Associates
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Manufacturing Company10%
Comms Service Provider9%
University8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider22%
Media Company6%
Government5%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider56%
Financial Services Firm17%
Energy/Utilities Company11%
Media Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider31%
Media Company7%
K 12 Educational Company Or School4%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm22%
Aerospace/Defense Firm11%
Energy/Utilities Company11%
Government11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company37%
Comms Service Provider14%
Government5%
Insurance Company4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise40%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business32%
Midsize Enterprise23%
Large Enterprise46%
REVIEWERS
Small Business42%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise42%
REVIEWERS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise38%
Large Enterprise33%
Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper SRX vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Juniper SRX is ranked 9th in Firewalls with 18 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 11th in Firewalls with 15 reviews. Juniper SRX is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX writes "This best in class Next-Gen firewall is elegant in its ease-of-use and architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "You can scale it if you put it in Auto Scaling groups. On the cloud side, they need to come up with more HA solutions to support the multi-region". Juniper SRX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, pfSense, Meraki MX and Check Point Virtual Systems, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, CyberArk PAS and Cisco ASAv. See our Juniper SRX vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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.