FireMon Security Manager Previous Solutions
We started with another solution called ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer, and we had that throughout our customers' sites. We recently started moving things over to FireMon for our old customers. If you run into Firewall Analyzer, run, don't walk, to the nearest exit.
Firewall Analyzer was so labor intensive just to do a report. You would tell it to look up an IP address and create the report, it would create a 20-page report, but you'd end up having to do that 20 times until you got the entire report. It could take six to eight hours to do a report. With FireMon, I hit "report," walk away, and it says, "Hey, your report's ready."
View full review »Before FireMon, we were using FireEye. We switched because it could not generate the topology or draw it. It had a hard time with our Firepower Management Center, getting the firewall configuration and some of our ASAs. I also could not map the Cisco ACI environment.
View full review »JO
Jideofor Okenwa
IT Manager for Networks and Cloud Infrastructure at a government with 10,001+ employees
Before FireMon, we used native solutions provided by Check Point. We switched because each of our departments has its requirements. They needed a product that would provide them with better service. They came to the central unit, which is where I work, to ask that something be procured, and that's why we procured FireMon. There are certain facilities in FireMon that give it an advantage over certain other companies or providers.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
FireMon Security Manager
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about FireMon Security Manager. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
MH
reviewer1727610
Network Security Analyst at a government with 10,001+ employees
We did not use another similar solution prior to this one. FireMon was purely stood up to clean up the firewall rules.
View full review »RN
reviewer1658859
Network Engineer at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Prior to FireMon, the company was using Tufin.
The reason that we switched is that somebody in the company decided that they wanted to have a one-stop solution for pushing the policies to the firewall, and for automation of policies to facilitate compliance. FireMon had the capability, which was proven with a PoC.
Everybody liked the solution and that's why it was implemented. Ultimately, the one-stop solution was not used because, with our Palo Alto firewalls, it has been decided that Panorama will push the rules, rather than FireMon. At this point, I can't see that changing in the future. Panorama is not going anywhere because that is how the firewalls are managed. At the same time, they wouldn't want to rely on FireMon to push rules to Panorama, so this is why the system will stay as it is.
Overall, however, the capabilities are better compared to other similar products.
View full review »WL
reviewer2244066
Security Engineer at a individual & family service with 10,001+ employees
Networking-wise, I used a number of different solutions, but I didn't use anything similar to FireMon before.
View full review »JE
reviewer1643730
IT Security Admin at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
FireMon identifies risks in our environment and helps to prioritize fixes. This has been a good usage. When we first got FireMon, we built out several custom reports, as well as the built-in reports, which have helped us tighten our security rules. FireMon has helped us improve 2000 rules in the span of three months. These were rules that presented a risk to our organization before we had the project with FireMon to fix those rules.
We are spending about the same amount of time creating new reports as we did with our old reporting processes. However, the new compliance reports that we are turning out are across the board better, e.g., we are getting full change histories. We are getting when you have a control that does not allow a risky service out to the Internet. For example, it automatically goes through the rule base and then distills that report for you, rather than cherry-picking like we did on our old processes. These reports are more accurate and much better.
We used a competing vendor before we bought FireMon. During our purchase phase, when we were looking to replace that vendor, we also did evaluations of two other alternatives as well.
The primary reason that we switched to FireMon from our previous firewall administration platform was that there were bugs in it specific to the firewalls that we were using. This made things, like change detection and their version of compliance controls, unworkable so there was inaccurate reporting.
The secondary reason that we switched to FireMon was the previous solution's support. The support of the people, whom we were using before FireMon, was absolutely terrible.
View full review »BK
reviewer942852
Project Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Before FireMon everything was manual.
View full review »JP
Jeff Plotkin
Lead Network Specialist at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
FireMon is a totally new implementation. We previously did everything manually.
We chose FireMon because it was recommended to us by the auditors and it was time to automate it as much as we could.
View full review »AG
Alejandro Gallo
Technical Account Manager at Axity de Colombia
Prior to FireMon, we were using Tufin. We switched to FireMon because the support for Tufin is not good. When I created a ticket, their response time was very poor.
FireMon is working to integrate with different vendors and different solutions like Palo Alto and Check Point. Tufin does not have many options when it comes to working with other vendors.
View full review »DJ
Daniel James
Security Engineer at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
For this type of use, we did not have a previous solution. Another team already owned this product in our company and we assumed ownership of the product from them.
View full review »SG
reviewer1954185
Solution Architect at a transportation company with 51-200 employees
We used Tufin. When we looked at FireMon we liked it from a price standpoint; it was better. We asked some peers about it through the reseller that we bought it through and got very good feedback. Those were the two main factors.
View full review »NS
InfoAssu7204
Info Assurance Engineer at a aerospace/defense firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We didn't use a previous solution.
View full review »KS
SecArch3081
IT Security Consultant and Platform Architect at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
We previously used separate database applications to route change requests for approval, and did not have a tool likeSecurity Managerwith visibility into all the firewall configs and activity.
View full review »In this environment, there were no previous solutions.
I have used other solutions at previous jobs. However, this is a solution I would like to bring with me if I ever ended up elsewhere in the future.
View full review »SW
NetworkSad34
Network Security Engineer- Senior at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We did not have a previous solution.
View full review »I don't think we used anything beforehand.
View full review »We did not previously use a different solution, that I know of. I’ve been with my current organization for almost three years and it's always been FireMon, so I don't know. I wasn't a part of that decision-making process.
View full review »TA
reviewer1703760
Security Analyst at a government with 501-1,000 employees
I am not aware of any previous solution.
View full review »MJ
reviewer1734798
Network Administrator at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
We did not have a previous solution. We just relied on regular reviews of our firewalls and rules by looking at the history.
View full review »We had no solution in place prior to this. FireMon was the best choice as they really specialize in this niche market.
View full review »Previously, we did not have a different solution.
View full review »We did not previously use a different solution. This was the first firewall management platform that we've used, except for the built-in, out-of-the-box tool that came with the platform.
View full review »We didn't previously use any other solution. This was definitely one of the best of its breed that we researched. Eventually, this tool is what we selected to go with.
View full review »We didn't have any other solution. This is the first of its kind.
View full review »We previously used an earlier release of FireMon and they had good success with that. In the newest release, we had a lot of problems. Prior to that, we really didn't have a tool to do that type of analysis for us. Although the most recent releases from Check Point have given us better analytics within our environment, FireMon has provided us with a better view into our environment. We didn't have anything prior to that.
View full review »MK
MikaKwok
IT Security Assistant Manager at Octopus Cards Limited
I have not worked with any product that is similar previously.
View full review »CG
Chris Goodrich
IT Security Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
I didn't really have another solution that I was using before it.
We had it when I started here five years ago.
View full review »I did not previously use a different solution.
View full review »GI
Technolo63ef
Technology Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Based on what I know, there were no previous products. My understanding was they brought this in because they did not have that capability, and so this was an enhancement to the organization overall. Previously, there wasn't any monitoring being done.
View full review »We did not have a previous solution.
View full review »We didn't use any other solution. This was definitely one of the best of its breed that we researched. Eventually, we selected this tool.
View full review »We used another product (Tufin). For us, we needed to make a change because they lacked the ability to support Palo Alto (at that time). FireMon was a better fit with that firewall.
View full review »No previous solutions were used.
View full review »MP
reviewer1740165
GISA at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
We did not have a previous solution.
View full review »I did not previously use a different solution.
View full review »JM
Joao Manso
CEO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
I used to work with AlgoSec. They are both very good products but they target different customers in our market. One is more expensive than the other. One is more simple than the other to use. For this reason, we decided to go with FireMon. The profile of our customers is more related to FireMon than AlgoSec.
View full review »Previously we were using AlgoSec, but it requires to be updated from time to time. Also, it wasn’t found to be a fruitful solution and has a lot of room for improvement.
View full review »This is my first time using a solution like this.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
FireMon Security Manager
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about FireMon Security Manager. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.