Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Reviews

I like its system management and filtering options as a layer seven firewall. You can also use a multi-mode environment, which means you can use multi-ISP. You can utilize that particular standard, and that is helpful. 

Moreover, there is an SDM in Cisco, though we are using Cisco FMC. FMC manages multiple FDT devices, and an entire organization can be managed over Cisco.

Some duplicated values and security standards are not working in some high-application protocols with Cisco's next-generation firewalls.

I have worked with Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center for five years.

Sometimes we face issues because VDP updates are happening frequently from Cisco. At that time, I have sometimes seen it rebooting FDT devices. It stabilizes once the solution updates the new policies. It is stabilizing now, whereas earlier, there were some bugs.

The solution is very easy to scale. Three people in my organization are working on it.

The core customer support is good, but they don't help us immediately. For example, if it is a P1 issue, they do not contact me immediately because it takes time to contact us. It will take time to resolve the issue if it's an emergency.

The installation is not that easy and not that tough also. When you learn Cisco, you can do the initial setup step by step. Some specific knowledge of rules is required to set up the solution. The deployment process takes more than a week, and five engineers are required to deploy it. Only two engineers are enough to maintain the product.

The solution is expensive. We have a multi-license, and we pay extra for support.

It is better to go with Palo Alto right now. Palo Alto is better from a price point-of-view, and some applications are better with Palo Alto than Cisco. However, Cisco is easy to learn compared to other solutions, and many people are learning to use Cisco. There are many documents for Cisco on the Internet. I rate Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center a nine out of ten.

I'm comfortable using it. It's okay; I use it quite frequently. I kept logs, but they indicate that suddenly the interface is overwhelmed with traffic, which leads to two types of errors. I generate a weekly report that I usually send to tech support. The main issue may be that the software is outdated or has some bugs.

We have used it before, and I'm comfortable managing this type of device. So I have requested our management to purchase a license and update the maintenance contract since I need to support that equipment and perform updates, patches, firmware, and other tasks.

I need to prepare the report based on the previous contact and make a request to the upper management. They decided, and as I mentioned earlier, I need to find a local partner. So I have discussed many times with the top partners, but I got declined.

Since it became unlicensed, there have been constant issues that became problematic. I can't understand why it happened. It was stable, stable, stable, and suddenly, there was a huge influx of traffic from the outside interface.

And basically, the services get disabled. I see SLA agents crashing and Smart Life Protection errors occurring. I believe it's due to the lack of license, but I can't explain why it's happening. So there have been many issues with stability.

It's not very user-friendly and can be somewhat disorganized.

In additional features, I think the login process could be improved. It's currently a big challenge, and creating proper and easy-to-generate reports is not very straightforward. There are some gaps that need to be addressed. 

It has been working since 2019, but recently, for the past year, we have encountered many issues with the software. It's currently completely out of license. So I usually have a backup, you know, to retrieve when it crashes. However, even with the backup, it doesn't work properly. There have been errors and disconnects for about two weeks. I'm currently using version 7.0.1.

We have Cisco Firepower 2100 series devices, and the actual software that manages the equipment is the Firepower Management Center. It's a tool with a visual environment on VMware bundle. That type of VM requires licensing.

It's hard to determine an exact rating for the stability of the solution because it depends on the specific version we use. For example, with the previous version, we encountered some issues, such as high CPU load. 

However, after upgrading to version 7.0.1, those issues were resolved. So, overall, I believe the software has shown improvement compared to the previous management center. I would rate it around six out of ten.

It's a fine solution in terms of scalability. It offers extensive scalability and flexibility. I would rate it a ten out of ten. There are around 1500 end users. 

Personally, I have not yet used the support directly since a third-party company has a contract with our organization. They handle most of the support and account management. In case we require support, we reach out to our partner for assistance.

The installation is relatively easy. I haven't found any issues with the installation. It's straightforward to install and deploy. I use a certain tool to install this product, then retrieve the backup from the SCUs.

It takes about fifteen minutes to deploy. It's just me handling the deployments. Moreover, I can manage the maintenance myself. However, for advanced troubleshooting or remote technical support, we would need experts to handle some advanced issues. So, for the standard maintenance, I can manage it myself.

I would say it's quite an expensive product. However, it could be considered relatively cheaper when compared to some other vendors in the market.

I would say it's around six out of ten, so it's quite pricey. The license cost was approximately $148,000 for a two-year or three-year usage period. Personally, I have not paid any additional costs because I started working after the licensing was already in place.

I would definitely recommend the product. However, I must emphasize that there are areas where the software itself could be improved. Based on feedback from other colleagues in my line of work, it should be more user-friendly and better organized. On the positive side, it allows for great customization and the ability to create quick reports or logs using templates.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I had a challenging time trying to size the firewall on the cloud. Maybe the information is there, but I couldn't find it easily. Usually, it depends on the cloud provider itself, whether you use AWS or Azure. These guys give you the information, so this part is not as detailed.

I have used Cisco products for more than 10 years, but I've used Secure Firewall Management Center for two years.

My clients have never contacted me with any issues, so I believe the solution is stable.

I rate Secure Firewall Management Center eight out of 10 for scalability. My client's organization has more than 5,000 users. 

My company provided local support to our client, and we don't usually go to the vendor. I rate Cisco support eight out of 10. 

The deployment took three or four weeks. The implementation team deployed it. I was only the architect. 

I rate Secure Firewall Management Center eight out of 10 for pricing. 

My customer needed multi-tier firewalls, so they purchased Cisco and another product, and they knew what they want. 

I rate Cisco Secure Firewall Management eight out of 10. Cisco firewalls aren't fully mature like other competitors in terms of controls. For example, it isn't good if you want to block some specific functions of an application or use it on the SD-WAN feature. You can only allow or block the whole application. For other firewalls, you can select specific features for the SD-WAN.

You have to go with the FTD license. They still have the ASA model, which is only Layer 4 firewall. If you're going to use Cisco, you should go with FirePOWER. There are two interfaces using different technologies, and they don't work together.  The other firewalls let you manage the whole thing from one interface. There are still some concerns with Cisco, but they recently released the 3000-Series, which is really promising.

We use the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center to manage our firewall devices. Every configuration is applied to the management center, and any policy will be pushed and deployed to the firewall. We use the solution for management, reporting, and logging analysis.

The solution has a great UI and a policy deployment mechanism, and all the configuration is easily manageable for the firewalls.

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center's logging functionality could be improved.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center for four years.

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is a stable solution.

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is a highly scalable solution.

The solution's technical support team is very supportive.

Around 20 people are required to deploy and maintain the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.

The solution has great functionality and a user-friendly interface. It also has great functionality for reconstruction. It's also automated and can be integrated with other devices, services, or interfaces.

Overall, I rate Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of the solution is a VPN.

The most valuable features are the Virtual Private Network and the Electronic Control Lists. We are using the ECL on our desktops.

There is a performance issue with the STDs. There are full limitations on the site where we installed IPS and IDS, which is a prevention system. This is affecting the mentioned performance, which is not up to the standard required for the books. Furthermore, if we have to failover, we will have to do an RMA, and then rebuild it, since there is no solution. If the file is RMA, it will not be in the cluster. This means we have to build a new cluster, which will result in downtime.

The performance of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could be improved. It is very slow and difficult to manage the group. Previously, it was based on the CLI, but the group performance did not meet the market standards. When comparing Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center with Palo Alto, the SMPS of Palo Alto is much better.

I have been using the solution for over six years.

I give the stability a nine out of ten.

The technical support is helpful and responsive.

Positive

We are also using Palo Alto Networks.

The initial setup is straightforward. The transcriptions with the AFS are easier to install and manage. The deployment time depends on the environment and the number of configurations, but a basic installation is between two and three hours.

The implementation was completed in-house.

Technical support is an additional annual cost and is not included with the license.

I give the solution a six out of ten.

We have over 1,000 people using the solution in our organization.

The maintenance can be done by one person.

Depending on an organization's requirements, I recommend the solution.

We use the product as a primary firewall for remote VPN.

One of the most valuable features of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is its integration with intrusion prevention and security intelligence.

Improving the product by incorporating SD-WAN functionality would be highly beneficial, especially for remote offices with limited server and Internet availability.

We've been using the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center for five years.

I rate the platform's stability a nine out of ten. They are making certain improvements in the feature.

We have 1500 Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center users in our organization. It is highly scalable, and I rate its scalability a ten out of ten.

While there have been instances of good support and services, there have also been times when they fell short of expectations.

Positive

We encountered some difficulties during the setup process, particularly with Wi-Fi configuration. While it wasn't overly challenging, it needed to be more straightforward. Assistance from Cisco support was available, but it required some effort, including using command-line scripts in addition to the graphical interface. The deployment timeline varied depending on the specific setup and office locations, but typically, it could take a couple of days if managed in-house. 

I rate the process a five out of ten.

Our in-house team handled the deployment without the involvement of third-party integrators or consultants.

The platform is costly.

The platform has significantly enhanced our organization's operations by providing secure communication channels between different office locations. It includes establishing secure tunnels for office-to-office communication and enabling remote users to access internal resources securely.

It offers good value for the investment. While it provides powerful features and support, there might be occasional challenges with internal support.

I rate it a nine out of ten.

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is used as a part of our layer for security.

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could improve by being less expensive.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center for approximately four years.

We have not had any complaints about the stability of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is scalable.

We have under five IT employees using this solution in my company.

The deployment of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center took approximately two days.

We did the implementation of the solution with assistance. However, it depends on the location of the deployment.

When you are using a Cisco solution you know it will be expensive. Cisco makes you pay for everything individually. We pay for the licenses that we need.

My advice for others when implementing this solution is they should find someone who understands the licenses.

 rate Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center a seven out of ten.

The platform's most valuable feature is the intrusion prevention system (IPS). It offers many customization options.

We encountered challenges, particularly when building use cases for this firewall, as it requires specific OS versions and firmware upgrades, which can lead to increased downtime.

It adds an administrative burden on the operation team, as it is essential for managing the firewalls.

I recommend they work on usability and ensure the solution is more user-friendly. It includes improving the connectivity and functionality when bugs occur.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center for one year.

I rate the product's scalability as a nine, particularly for larger hardware appliances.

The technical support team is responsive and supportive. 

Positive

The platform's deployment can take about two days to complete especially if all components need to be configured.

The product pricing is reasonable and falls in the mid-range.

Setting up the solution's management center is relatively easy, but we occasionally face bugs that require additional troubleshooting.

I recommend taking comprehensive backups and preparing thoroughly for implementation, especially when managing multiple nodes.

Overall, I rate it as a seven out of ten.