Most Helpful Review
I discovered that I could still keep the data rates really high, up near the 1 gigahertz data speed, without...
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
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.
Cisco ASA NGFW significantly improves our bank. It protects any high-value products that we use from hackers, viruses, malware, and script-bots. It gives us metrics on network traffic as well as what kind of attacks we are getting from the outside.
Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization.
It allows me to easily connect with more than forty-five remote sites and more than fifty remote users between IPsec and SSL VPN, applying the web filter and application filter to ensure a secure connection.
Configuration troubleshooting is eased by the use of the color-coded, live firewall log.
The features that I've known to be most valuable are both the web security features as well as the web firewall capabilities. As a partner of Sophos firewall, we have some clients and they are using Sophos firewall UTM and we are using it as well.
Sophos UTM has improved the porting section. It has improved security by seeing the gaps. For example, when you discover that an entry has been using a certain application, with Sophos UTM acting as a Layer 7 firewall, you can block the application, not the port.
The most valuable feature is the IPS. It also protects us from malware.
UTM 9 brings along IPSec as well as iPhone and iPad support. This seems small but it’s useful.
The isolation of infected machines is a big feature. Also, the ability to detect external sources that change files on a file server is really big.
Advanced protection (Sophos Sandstorm) - Protects against crypto viruses in real-time.
HostWatch makes it so I can see, in real-time, activity in the event that there is something weird happening on the network. This simplifies my job.
The product's usability is good. It is straightforward and simple. One of the benefits is that it is easy to navigate and intuitive.
The throughput is great. It's perfect. We have no issues whatsoever. The management features are very powerful...
It's pretty simple to use. It's pretty simple to understand, and there's plenty of documentation. It does a pretty good job of what it is meant to do.
One of the most valuable features is the Geolocation. Because we aren't a multinational corporation, it allows me to look at things which might be suspicious to make sure that they are legitimate transactions rather than people sniffing around the network.
One of my favorite features is the Geolocation service, where you can actually block specific activity or IP addresses registered to certain countries. For example, I don't want any web traffic from Russia or North Korea. I may even lock down certain policies down to 'I only want U.S. IP addresses.' I find that very useful.
They've done a lot of work with their SD-WAN, which we do use, to have our old internet service with our new internet service. If anything goes down on a particular interface, I can have different rules applied. Most of my users don't even know when our primary internet goes down anymore... I don't have to be here to do anything to switch it to our backup internet or to switch it back.
If there is any conflict, the reporting feature will kick out all types of information, which is great.
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.
Cisco should improve its user interface design. There is a deep learning curve to the product if you are a newcomer.
There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products.
I would like to see the SD-WAN feature improved.
Support for IKEv2 is needed in this solution.
The only time we face a problem or issues is when we place a ticket. We have found that response is very slow.
With Sophos UTM, there is a general rule in the firewall when the country blocking can block some countries from accessing your data. In the current version, you still need to add it by putting in the IP range. This feature would be helpful for administrators and it gives them the advantage to block stuff in less time.
The solution could be improved by adding cloud soundboxing.
We didn’t find any issues but I know there have been some in the last few years.
It does have built-in policies, which enable you to disable USB devices, etc. It would be nice if they had more policies because there are not that many of them.
There is still room for improvement in wireless protection. I don't mean their WiFi device is bad, but there are still things to improve on, such as WiFi roaming.
Sometimes, the writing rules are a little confusing in how am I doing them.
We were able to take from an older configuration, build a new one quickly, and get it up and running, which didn't take long, but there was some pain around it.
The software base, the management piece that goes onto a server, is not as user-friendly as I would like. There are three different pieces that you have to manage, so it's a little bit convoluted, in my opinion.
Last year, I had an issue with one of the Fireboxes going down. It was overheated, because my server room became overheated and this fried it.
The drawbacks are just sometimes not having the technical information that we need in order to easily make connections with all of our Internet-based clients.
Reporting is something you've got to set up separately. It's one of those things that you've got to put some time into. One of the options is to set up a local report server, which is what I did. It's not great. It's okay... Some of the stuff is a little complicated to get up and running. Once you do, it becomes very user-friendly and easy to work with, but I find there are some implementation headaches with some of their stuff.
The software in it could be a bit more friendly for an amateur user. I look at it and don't understand what half the stuff is. Looking at the interface, it is all mumbo-jumbo to me. It's not a simple interface. You have to be an IT guy to understand it. It is not for your average person to use, then walk away from it. It is much more entailed.
I would like a deeper insight into their bandwidth monitoring.
Pricing and Cost Advice
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.
The cost is a bit high compared to other solutions in the market.
Cisco recently has become very expensive.
This solution is less expensive than FortiGate.
The biggest issue with Sophos is the pricing. It's definitely more expensive. As I said, we looked at Webroot, which is a big alternative, and Sophos was almost three times the price of Webroot. That's a pretty big difference.
Sometimes more is less, meaning if you want more than three features, take the FullGuard licence.
We purchased the appliance with five years onsite support and licenses.
Pricing for the upgrade was very competitive as Sophos wanted to retain existing customers.
The pricing and licensing are both good and better than Sophos's competitors. This is why we went with the product.
The AWS Marketplace product should be a better fit, but it is a little pricier.
Purchasing through the AWS Marketplace is pretty straightforward. Because were entirely on AWS and don't have anything anywhere else. It made the most sense for us as a one stop shop.
Their price point worked, which is the reason why we stayed with WatchGuard.
We pay about $3,500 every three years.
I think we might be subscribed to one or two of the premium features.
We had a trade-in offer at the end of our first three-year term. As a result, we pretty much got a free device by buying the three-year subscription. It was around $3,000 for the three-years.
There is an additional cost for support on top of licensing. When I bought my new unit, I received additional time added to my support.
Our licensing costs are around $3000 on a yearly basis. It is just a licensing fee for the services, like the UTM services, and it includes support.
The cost three years ago was about $800.
The two larger devices are about $1,000 each and the smaller ones are about $500 or $600 each... It's cheaper and you have more control because it's self-managed.
Compared 38% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 33% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA||Astaro|
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.
|The global network of highly skilled researchers and analysts, protecting businesses from known and emerging malware - viruses, rootkits and spyware.|
WatchGuard's approach to network security focuses on bringing best-in-class, enterprise-grade security to any organization, regardless of size or technical expertise. Ideal for SMBs and distributed enterprise organizations, our award-winning Unified Threat Management (UTM) appliances are designed from the ground up to focus on ease of deployment, use, and ongoing management, in addition to providing the strongest security possible.
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Sophos UTM
Learn more about WatchGuard Firebox
|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.||One Housing Group||Ellips, Diecutstickers.com, Clarke Energy, NCR, Wrest Park, Homeslice Pizza, Fortessa Tableware Solutions, The Phoenix Residence|
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider11%
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm12%
Software R&D Company6%
Software R&D Company20%
Comms Service Provider19%
Software R&D Company18%
Comms Service Provider13%