Most Helpful Review
Researched Juniper SRX but chose Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall: A flexible and easy to manage solution for segregating our servers from the rest of the environment
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
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.
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.
The most valuable feature is the automatic scaling. With its microservices, it scales both up and down, depending on traffic and throughput.
The UI was also one of the huge selling points. My web development manager was blown away with the detail and the granularity that you can get out of the UI. It is a very strong and informative UI, with the amount of data it provides.
We were able to see what devices are talking to each other, giving us more visibility.
It has helped us tighten our security posture. Now, staff can only access things that they should be accessing.
The Adaptive Intention Engine is fantastic. It allows us to develop security policies using the language of our internal customers. It's machine-learning applied to security workflows. That allows us to much more easily construct the policies that will protect those workflows.
...It takes the exact same policies that you would apply to your on-premise environment and enables you to simply apply them to the cloud. It becomes one policy for both on-prem and for the cloud.
ShieldX has been designed from the very beginning to work well in cloud environments. It understands autoscaling, automation, and auto-configuration. These are the things which are important in today's operating environment.
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.
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.
There should be a bit more customer care, with regular review meetings on it or regular reports. It would be nice to have a quarterly or biannual review of what ShieldX has blocked.
I would like better reports and in-depth reporting.
We are having some issues with their LDAP and integrating it with the Active Directory. We can't seem to set it up.
With any kind of tool like ShieldX, where you're in the cloud instead of a traditional firewall, you're using CPU resources in those environments to provide the protection. So there's a cost associated with CPU resources. I'm pressing upon them to make the product much more efficient and use less CPUs to do the same thing.
They need to be consistent in performance and capabilities over time, given the fact that this is new and I want to see where this goes in the next year or so. As the vendor continues to evolve and add future functionality, we want to make sure that we are still keeping up with the integrations, etc. Time will be the key factor here. The proper support for some of the latest technologies, Docker containers, etc. They need to keep up with threat landscape, so we will see how the security get layered. This is what we are going to be keeping an eye on.
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.
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.
For a three-year deal we paid £55,000 plus tax... But, and this is a big "but," this was over two years ago. ShieldX had only just hit the market. We were the first company in Europe to buy ShieldX.
For other security professions who are looking for something which is low in cost that does microsegmentation, they should look at ShieldX. It might not be the big name out there, but it does everything that you are looking for in microsegmentation at a very low price.
ShieldX also enables us to migrate to cloud environments faster. That is an important part of it for sure because it takes the exact same policies that we would apply to our on-premise environment and enables us to simply apply them to the cloud. It becomes one policy for both on-prem and for the cloud.
ShieldX ensures that we can have the separation needed for our environment to avoid drastically increasing the cost on the licensing side. From this perspective, it's been very positive and helpful.
We are very happy with the pricing and licensing. It's about getting a site-wide license. One of the challenges that we've had with our previous vendor had been the cost of licensing.
We are actually expecting our costs to drop in the coming year, but it is just a matter of the licensing expiring. That is going to happen in the next six months or so. Then, we will start to see a decrease in overall spend.
Security policies are now applied as applications are going up. Because it's automated, we don't have the three to four week delay. The insertion of applications in the cloud for us dropped from an average of three to four weeks to a couple of days.
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.
Question: What do you like most about Juniper SRX?
Top Answer: The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control.
Question: What needs improvement with Juniper SRX?
Top Answer: When we first tested the serial interface on our model, it did not work. It should be easier to escalate support tickets.
Question: What do you like most about ShieldX?
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is the automatic scaling. With its microservices, it scales both up and down, depending on traffic and throughput.
Top Answer: We did quite a good deal on ShieldX. For a three-year deal we paid £55,000 plus tax. That works out to about £1,500 a month. Alert Logic was £2,500 a month on a three-year deal. But, and this is a big… more »
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 34% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 29% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco ASA Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls||SRX||APEIRO, ShieldX APEIRO|
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.
|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 ShieldX Elastic Security Platform dynamically scales to deliver comprehensive and consistent controls to protect data centers, cloud infrastructure, applications and data no matter where they are or where they go to make the cloud more secure than on-premise deployments. Our frictionless approach leverages agentless technology as well as the ShieldX Adaptive Intention Engine which autonomously translates and enforces intention into a set of comprehensive controls - microsegmentation, firewall, IPS and more - making security the easiest thing you do in the cloud.
Learn more about Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall
Learn more about Juniper SRX
Learn more about ShieldX
|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, Chinas 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., Hillenbrand||Iowa State University|
Financial Services Firm20%
Comms Service Provider9%
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider22%
Comms Service Provider56%
Financial Services Firm17%
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider31%
K 12 Educational Company Or School4%
Computer Software Company92%
Comms Service Provider1%
No Data Available
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.