We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable."
"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"FortiGate firewalls are user-friendly, and I like the security profiling features."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"What's most important is the ease of use."
"We have found it to be very reliable and that's why our teams and various users in our company use it as our main firewall every day."
"The email protection and VPN features are the most valuable."
"The features I found most valuable in this solution, are the overall security features."
"It makes it very easy to have delineated roles and responsibilities between network engineering and network security."
"In v9.8 you are able to do active/backup HA with ASAv (Adaptive Security Virtual Appliance) deployed on MS Azure."
"The Adversity Malware Protection (AMP) feature is the most valuable. It is also very easy to use. Every technical user can operate this solution without any difficulty. The dashboard of Cisco Firepower has every tool that a security operator needs. You can find every resource that you need to operate through this dashboard."
"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 integrates with various Cisco security portfolios and products, and there is an easy and seamless integration for building a complete security framework for our customers."
"The architecture of FTD is great because it has an in-depth coverage and because it uses the AVC, (Application, Visibility, and Control) and also rate limits. Also, the architecture of fast paths is great."
"The TAC is always very helpful. We pay for Tier 1 support, so we get whatever we need from them. They always give us a solution. If they can't give us an answer that day, they get back to us within at least 24 hours with a solution or fix. I have never had a problem with the TAC. I would rate them as 10 out of 10."
"The VPN is great."
"The most valuable feature is the console management."
"I don't have anything bad to say about the product. I absolutely love it."
"I like the IPS. IPS is the master feature. I depend on the firewall and sandbox."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The most valuable feature is controlling the traffic and the logging. They have real-time logins for traffic logs. Troubleshooting was very easy for me."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is very simple, easy to use, and flexible."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"The reports are very basic."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"The search tool needs improvement. It's very difficult to search for policies right now."
"WAN load-balancing could be a lot better at detecting when a link is poor or inconsistent, and not just flat out dead."
"FortiOS is not simple."
"One area for improvement is the performance on bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"It should have a better pricing plan. It is too expensive. It should also have a more granular view of the attack. I don't have FortiAnalyzer, and it is difficult for me to have a complete view when there is an attack on my server."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"Web filtering needs improvement because sometimes the URL is miscategorized."
"Setting firewall network rules should be more straightforward with a clearer graphical representation. The rule-setting method seems old-fashioned. The firewall and network rules are separate from the Firepower and web access rules."
"The Sandbox and the Web Censoring in this solution need to be improved."
"The most valuable features of the product are the VPN and the NextGen firewall features such as application control, URL filtering, etc."
"I would like it to be easier to work with and have a better user interface. It is not straightforward. You need to know the Cisco command-line interface."
"Tech support could not answer all of our questions. I had to do research on the web to solve my issues."
"The stability could be better because we have a lot of issues with the stability of Cisco Firepower."
"An area for improvement is the graphical user interface. That is something that is coming up now. They could make the product more user-friendly. A better GUI is something that would make life much easier."
"Its management center should be easier to use. The management interface of Forcepoint is unique and a little bit different from some of the firewall solutions on which people might have worked before. Sometimes, the customers say that it is not very friendly, and we help them with how to use this management interface. It just takes a little bit of time, and after some time, it gets easy to manage or use. It is quite similar to Palo Alto, Fortinet, and legacy Juniper solutions. Their support should be faster. We have received complaints that they are not responding fast, which is not good for the vendor and us."
"Management could be better. They can improve the management. I think all our customers can't accept firewalls that have standalone management. So, they prefer Fortinet or Palo Alto. But overall, inspection and other features are working fine."
"The network interface could be better, and it could be cheaper."
"Making this solution easier to use would be an improvement."
"Configuration is not easy because it has an old-fashioned interface. The configuration interface is highly complex, and it's been the same for years. They have to change the interface."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall could change its interface, allowing standard or direct connect modes to be configured."
"They should have a GUI on the product itself, not a separate management tool to be used on the management server or on a server to be used to manage the file. It should be all in one device. The device should be controlled through its own GUI. They also have to improve the learning center and the documents as the documents don't really help."
"Its interface is complex when compared with a firewall like FortiGate. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall needs a management console, whereas FortiGate doesn't need any console. When you have a few devices, a console is not really necessary. It's good to have a private console only when you have a lot of devices."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 40 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Darktrace. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall 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.
