Cisco Secure Firewall Reviews

The use case at my company is to secure our campus and our different data centers.

My most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Firewall is that I can see what is where, which rules are applied where, and create templates. In general, it's a good feature for us.

Having Cisco Secure Firewall has definitely helped our organization because we are a German company that follows rules, so we have governance. We need to deploy the same type of governance everywhere, and it's much easier to deploy this way, even with some country-to-country differences.

To improve Cisco Secure Firewall product, we have a TAC case open for that, but I would prioritize responsiveness for sure, as UX/UI is always something to work on. We have complaints from our NOC people, but they are always complaining.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall at my company for a year.

When it comes to reliability with Cisco Secure Firewall, it's not necessarily about downtime; it's about reliability in updates. We want something that can be updated easily and reliably. When we push an update, we don't want it to crash, of course, and we want to be sure that we are up in the security game. This is one of the main reasons I'm here, as everything security-related is quite important to us. We mostly have on-premises devices and our own data centers, so it's crucial that the tools we buy are reliable.

I find Cisco Secure Firewall to be pretty easy to scale, and I was in a meeting this week with Cisco insiders who said it's going to be even easier in the future.

They're going to provide us with AI now for Cisco Secure Firewall, and we will just be able to chat while everything does itself.

Regarding customer support, I had a meeting yesterday with them for Cisco Secure Firewall. We are a very large company, so we open TAC cases quite often because we have more than 200 people working in security at my company. We find problems all the time, and most of the time it's quite responsive. However, one of the reasons we come to Cisco Live is to meet face-to-face with the engineers and their managers to ask why a particular TAC case hasn't moved for the last couple of months, and we want answers. We're not afraid to say when it's bad, but we also recognize when it's good. We want answers. If you don't want to tell us why, tell us why you don't want to tell us why. Generally, we have a very good relationship with Cisco.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the support for Cisco Secure Firewall a nine, even if sometimes we have some bumps. I understand the effort all the support team needs to provide to reach this level. Living in Warsaw, I have seen the Krakow office grow, and I believe it's a fantastic development for Poland to have so many people there. I hope Cisco continues investing there.

I believe we were using another product before Cisco Secure Firewall, but I don't have the detailed answer. I work at digital department, where we provide all IT and IT infrastructure for the company, so it's quite a large environment with 2,000 people in the networking team globally. I don't know what everyone is doing, even if I should probably know.

Evaluating other solutions is becoming my job now, and I'm focusing on three main topics: creating the lab for the networkers at my company, evaluating the monitoring capabilities for the networkers, and looking into AI tools for our networking team. I know some of my colleagues in architecture are also evaluating tools more in detail, ranging from SD-WAN to firewall to switching. We have many solutions here in Cisco, and we are all communicating to share opinions, even if it's not our core role to have answers. It's a good thing.

This new AI functionality will definitely help our company operate more efficiently for the SOC team, especially concerning deploying different rules and rule sets. This year, when we faced problems with the geopolitical environment, our company decided to enforce policies on some countries, and instead of reviewing hundreds of thousands of IP addresses manually, we could just do five clicks to shut off a whole part of Ukraine very easily. It's a life-saver sometimes.

I think in general, Cisco Secure Firewall is a really great product, and we will just go with the flow. AI is probably something that we need to go with, but let's not implement AI everywhere for the sake of it. Let's ensure it's useful, and I believe it has its utility there as well.

I don't think there is anything competing on the market at the moment. There is nothing competing on the market, so I have given Cisco Secure Firewall an overall rating of ten. I appreciate your understanding; when I mention integers, I know that engineers will understand exactly what I'm talking about.

Concerning the pricing and licensing of Cisco Secure Firewall, that's not really my part. My focus is on the product itself — how good it is, how it competes, and how well it fits our needs. I do ask about pricing, but that ultimately goes to board management for negotiating directly with Cisco. I have an overview of the pricing, of course, and I can share with my management what the pricing is versus competitors. We often see significant disparities, but most of the time there are valid reasons with Cisco.

Cisco Secure Firewall serves as our primary line of defense when receiving traffic for the customers that we serve, and from there, it is distributed across our network. It is the main firewall for the division of service that we manage the network for.

Cisco Secure Firewall performs very well in that the web interface is manageable when deploying configurations because it is very easy to set up. I don't have to write all those lines of configuration codes directly on the devices, but I can do it on a visual interface where I can double-check before pushing any configuration through, and that is very useful. When setting VPN connections, the filtering during troubleshooting is particularly helpful, as the Cisco IOS CLI has never been very capable when filtering during troubleshooting of a deep issue, and the interface is very helpful when it comes to that.

There are quite a lot of bugs when opening sub-windows, as sometimes I cannot extend the size to read more information, and when writing a long line of text, it can be annoying.

There are quite a lot of bugs when opening sub-windows, as sometimes I cannot extend the size to read more information, and when writing a long line of text, it can be annoying.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for approximately three or four years now.

I have seen some instability regarding Cisco Secure Firewall. This may have been on us because we had a provisioning capacity issue and had to make an upgrade to serve the needs of our network. We experienced the issue due to a memory issue with one of our firewall pairs. Despite that issue, the devices are very reliable and stable under normal functioning.

Cisco Secure Firewall is very scalable. It is almost transparent from both customer and service technician perspectives, and I would give Cisco a 10 for scalability. This has been one of its strengths in their history.

I have contacted the technical support or customer support of Cisco regarding this solution. The speed of the support was appropriate. The quality was challenging to assess because when given a problem to resolve, there are so many details to recover and so much context of the company's usage to understand that it is not as simple as saying the official support of Cisco must have a magic wand to resolve the issue. At the end of the day, they were not able to provide the proper insight that we needed to resolve the issue we were facing at the time.

It is worth mentioning that our head of network is one of the toughest professionals I have come across when it comes to networking, and this may have made it more difficult for them because every person who came on the line was way ahead of them. When trying to get to a solution and having to repeat myself, I can come into a call not knowing everything, and recovery scripts must be run to gather information, analyze it, and then come back with a solution. In the end, it did not work, and we had to use another workaround developed by us. I would not say the support was bad; it was efficient in communication, but the final solution was not satisfactory.

I have never used any direct alternative to Cisco Secure Firewall, although there were discussions about switching to another vendor. After a lot of discussion, we remained with Cisco for its capabilities and some other details. It came into consideration to switch to another vendor for administrative decisions because Cisco solutions are quite expensive, and other vendors might do the job for a considerably lower amount, but Cisco remained. We never managed to use an alternative.

The initial deployment was most difficult because there were some compatibility issues. At the time I came to the team, we were transitioning from Cisco ASA to the new Firepower solution, and the tools for migrating the configuration about the objects were not working properly. I did not have the time to work out why since I was not the main architect of the network and was in a lesser role, but this was one of the main challenges I worked on. We had to do a lot of scripting and manual work to migrate the objects and configure the new solution because Cisco ASA was not very capable of extracting the information to push to a newer generation of firewalls.

We handle maintenance on Cisco Secure Firewall ourselves. We require maintenance and upgrades, and we do it ourselves.

I would rate this product an 8 out of 10 overall.

Our company's use case involves internal data center firewalls, mostly for east-west traffic.

The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Firewall is the firewalling, which is essentially the security part of the firewall.

The security is improving with the blocking of access and the access rules. Security-wise, I find that it helps improve access between entities and departments, and more importantly, it covers the regulatory aspect as well.

If I could improve Cisco Secure Firewall, I would focus on the fact that there are many bugs, specifically with the FTDs. The versioning and software stability need improvement.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for almost ten years.

Regarding bugs in Cisco Secure Firewall, for example, the logs show some traffic between two endpoints while others do not, which is a bug we found out recently. Cisco has reviewed it, and we are trying to fix it through an upgrade.

The bugs are problematic.

Cisco Secure Firewall is scalable and reliable. Regarding scalability, it is seamless. We have had a recent upgrade, added new data centers, and enhanced the existing firewalls.

My experience with their support team is that support is good and they are quite responsive. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate them a ten for good support.

Positive

I know that they evaluated other companies, including Forcepoint, a company providing firewalls as well, specifically next-generation firewalls. They picked Cisco Secure Firewall mainly for the FTD and superior Cisco support, which was the main deciding factor.

Deployment-wise, Cisco Secure Firewall is straightforward, as all Cisco products are straightforward. It takes roughly two months to deploy Cisco Secure Firewall, but it depends on the type of implementation and the specific data center involved.

The two months mainly involve the LLDs, the design phase, and the shipping. The most delay comes from shipping and delivery, as the standard delivery from Cisco is six to eight weeks, which is where the delay occurs, while the rest of the activities are completed prior to that. I would rate Cisco Secure Firewall a seven on a scale of one to ten overall. I would not rate it a ten due to the stability of the product needing improvement, specifically with the FTD.

My main use for Cisco Secure Firewall is primarily for our internal VMs and similar infrastructure.

What I like the most about Cisco Secure Firewall is that it performs better than our previous product. We had a lot of latency issues and general problems with our previous solution, but this firewall functions much better.

Cisco optimizes the experience by providing a single pane of glass for our GUI and firewall management, which is probably the best feature.

I assess the operational efficiency of Cisco in my IT environment as very strong, as it integrates well with most of our existing infrastructure since we are already a Cisco shop.

Cisco does optimize the experience in a hybrid or distributed enterprise setup.

I evaluate customer service and technical support as quite good. The documentation could use some improvement overall, as there are some errors in it. However, when we interact with support personnel and the AI agent, the experience is usually very good.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for about six months, having received our firewalls during that time.

I have not experienced any downtime or crashes.

Cisco Secure Firewall scales well with the growing needs of my organization and certainly scales beyond what we needed.

I evaluate customer service and technical support as quite good. The documentation could use some improvement overall, as there are some errors in it. However, when we interact with support personnel and the AI agent, the experience is usually very good.

Prior to Cisco, we were using a few different options, but much of our infrastructure was Grandpea and Upsense.

Deploying Cisco Secure Firewall was as painless as swapping an internal firewall can be.

I have seen ROI mainly because our firewall runs our internal infrastructure, and we offer some services behind it, so overall, I would say the ROI is positive.

My experience with price, setup costs, licensing, and related factors was beyond my direct involvement, but I know it came down to a deal that included other products. Overall, we were very happy with the arrangement.

What stood out to me during the evaluation process was that choosing Cisco made sense primarily because we are already a Cisco shop and are familiar with their sales representatives, products, and dashboards.

I give Cisco Secure Firewall an overall rating of eight out of ten.

I use Cisco Secure Firewall essentially as a firewall and for a secure access VPN solution. I need Cisco Secure Firewall to fulfill that role; I need it for secure access, and it performs the firewalling I need it to do in the network segment where it is located.

I have seen a return on investment with Cisco Secure Firewall. Generally, where it sits in my network, there are other vendors as well, but Cisco Secure Firewall is a better product and easier to manage than those alternatives. It does more of the features that I want it to do to be more secure, and I will move the other vendors into Cisco Secure Firewall.

The biggest challenge I have with Cisco Secure Firewall is that I often need to look in a few places to find what I want to do or I find myself searching for where a particular feature is located. I know what I want to accomplish, but I cannot always find it easily; it takes some time looking around. Because I do not use Cisco Secure Firewall as heavily as other vendors, I find it a little harder to navigate, though I would caveat that with the possibility that with more use, it would become easier for me to navigate and accomplish what I want to do. I am not sure how I would specifically improve that aspect, but it is probably the biggest day-to-day challenge I have with it.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for about a year, maybe just over.

Stability of Cisco Secure Firewall is generally very good.

In terms of scalability, because it is there for the secure access solution as well, it was right-sized when it was put in, so I have not had any scalability challenges for what I do. My organization is fairly static in terms of scale, so users and that type of thing do not scale up and down quickly; it is more slow-moving in that regard.

I have not done a whole lot of customer support with Cisco Secure Firewall.

Before Cisco Secure Firewall, I used Juniper as a vendor; I have used them with other vendors as well, but where I am using Cisco Secure Firewall, they are sort of a direct competitor with Juniper.

It took a couple of months to deploy Cisco Secure Firewall; that was the same for secure access, as it was all part of the same rollout. What took those months to deploy was probably more internal change controls; it is just slower moving, as I have done a lot of testing deployments in lab environments, so it is less of a technology issue and more of the constraints of where I work that slow it down.

I did not implement Cisco Secure Firewall personally, but I was there for the implementation.

I have seen a return on investment with Cisco Secure Firewall. Generally, where it sits in my network, there are other vendors as well, but Cisco Secure Firewall is a better product and easier to manage than those alternatives. It does more of the features that I want it to do to be more secure, and I will move the other vendors into Cisco Secure Firewall.

Integration with other systems is fairly slow-moving and static in that way. I would rate this review an 8.

Our main use case for Cisco Secure Firewall is to protect our RTU traffic, specifically on the operational technology side, for SCADA systems. For our side, we don't have encrypted traffic; for the most part, we have the firewall to protect everything behind it when it comes to RTU traffic, which is remote terminal units.

The visibility and control capabilities of Cisco Secure Firewall benefit our company by making it easier for us to parse through traffic that is denied or allowed through, and that helps us with troubleshooting, so it does help cut down on troubleshooting.

The feature of Cisco Secure Firewall that I prefer the most is the use of ASDM where we visually are able to see all of our traffic when it comes through the firewall. 

Cisco Secure Firewall does a good job unifying policies across our environments because we have many firewalls that have the same rules, so when Cisco Secure Firewalls are able to do that, that's very beneficial.

The fact that unifying policies will help us save time, costs, and be more efficient in general is very important for our company. Unfortunately, the impact of the cloud-delivered firewall on our company's security posture is negligible since we are an air-gapped system, and we do not deal with the cloud infrastructure.

Cisco Secure Firewall does a good job in helping our company implement a zero-trust security model, and it deserves an eight out of ten.

Cisco Secure Firewall could be improved in terms of the GUI and management. It could be more intuitive, as sometimes there might be too many features and buttons that make it harder when we're trying to parse through information. 

To make Cisco Secure Firewall a ten out of ten, improving the documentation of all the features would help significantly. I sometimes feel I'm just searching around on Google for specific configurations compared to Palo Alto, which has more detailed steps.

We've been using Cisco Secure Firewall for about 20 years. We've had it since the whole creation of our RT team.

In terms of stability and reliability, Cisco Secure Firewall is reliable. We haven't had real issues where these firewalls have gone down or anything of that nature, so we're happy with the consistency.

When it comes to the scalability of Cisco Secure Firewall, it scales very efficiently and is easy to implement with the growing needs of our company.

Our experience with customer service or technical support through TAC for Cisco Secure Firewall could be more in-depth instead of going through the first levels. 

We often find ourselves trying to escalate faster because we need timely responses. I would rate the customer service and technical support from Cisco Secure Firewall a six out of ten. They're good and know what they're doing in general. That said, it's not where we want it to be.

Neutral

We considered Palo Alto before choosing Cisco Secure Firewall, and we do have some Palo Altos on the network to compare. We're mostly using Cisco products in general. I'm aware Palo Alto is a strong competitor when it comes to firewalls.

The deployment is pretty seamless. Sometimes we do have some issues with Palo Alto Fireworks, where when it comes to deploying, it's not as intuitive. It doesn't work correctly, and there are some bugs that come up. So we have to troubleshoot that aspect. Cisco Secure Firewalls is pretty pretty seamless. 

The biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall comes from how intuitive it is. The more it's able to identify issues during troubleshooting, the better the ROI we achieve.

I'm not too concerned about the pricing of Cisco Secure Firewall. The pricing is fixed, and we're comfortable with it since pricing doesn't matter as much since we have to purchase it if there's a need for it.

The main differences between Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto come down to the GUI. They are on par when comparing unified policy and how to make things more intuitive for monitoring traffic and creating rules based on that traffic.

We haven't used any new features or functionalities in Cisco Secure Firewall recently. The features work efficiently, and I can't think of anything new that I would want right now.

I would rate Cisco Secure Firewall overall an eight out of ten; it's reliable, and we have no real issues.

Our company's use case for Cisco Secure Firewall is to separate and protect the different server network ranges in our data center and to provide access to and from those services that sit in our data center to users and customers alike. We also use Cisco Secure Firewall on the edge to provide internet access to and from the internet for our business.

The most valuable aspect of Cisco Secure Firewall for me is not a specific feature but the fact that it is quite stable as a firewall overall. It is not too buggy or disruptive when performing our day-to-day operations, and that is the main thing about it.

Centralized management of Cisco Secure Firewall benefits our organization because we have multiple firewalls, but we go to one single page or use the Firewall Management Center to administer policies and make changes. This allows us to see what is going on from a visibility perspective, so all troubleshooting, configuration, and administration of the firewall happens at one single place, which is beneficial.

A single pane of glass for management is available.

One thing I would improve in Cisco Secure Firewall is somehow embedding the capability to use an asterisk-type of firewall rules in the access control policy. An example could be star.google.com; being able to use an asterisk for anything in the subdomain would be beneficial, as I know some of Cisco's competitors allow that on their firewalls, which eliminates the need for an additional appliance to facilitate that component.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for about five years.

Currently, Cisco Secure Firewall has been up and running for about three years since its last reboot, so it is quite stable.

I find the solution to be scalable, especially with the other products that Cisco is developing. For instance, Cisco Secure Cloud now allows us to potentially take the management functions of Cisco Secure Firewall, move it into the cloud, and integrate it with other Cisco security products, managing everything from one single pane.

I have worked with Cisco's customer support.

When it comes to customer support, referring to TAC, I find that Cisco's support stands out. It is very important for us as a business to have that support when needed, and Cisco has often never failed in providing that support.

If I were to rate the support overall from one to ten, I would give it a nine.

While I rate it a nine, to make it a ten, it could be improved based on individual cases. Some support people truly embody Cisco's values in responding and assisting, but there are times when some individuals may not be as helpful as others, leading to a disconnect in the support experience.

Positive

Deploying Cisco Secure Firewalls is quite straightforward, as Cisco provides a lot of available documentation online, extensive support, and training, which makes it easy for engineers and customers to use Cisco products effectively.

The deployment time for Cisco Secure Firewalls varies. Currently, I am going through a refresh where we are replacing older Firepower systems with newer ones, but in the past, it has been relatively simple, typically taking within an hour or two to get everything up and running.

I have been part of the deployment of Cisco Secure Firewalls.

From a return on investment perspective, I think Cisco Secure Firewalls keep our organization safe and protect the organization's image from a governance standpoint. With cybersecurity being a big issue in the world, Cisco Secure Firewalls protect data, the environment, organization, and keep things safe. It is always reassuring for customers to know that the organization I work for invests in products like Cisco Secure Firewall to protect ourselves.

Cisco Secure Firewall is similar to insurance in that it provides peace of mind.

I rate Cisco Secure Firewalls a nine overall. While there are features I think could be added to achieve a perfect ten, I still regard it higher than its competitors. From both a technical and peace of mind perspective, Cisco Secure Firewall is the frontrunner.

I would tell someone considering purchasing Cisco Secure Firewalls that they will not be disappointed. My overall review rating for Cisco Secure Firewall is nine.

Cisco Secure Firewall is used for securing perimeters, such as internal or external perimeters of the network.

I consider a valuable feature of Cisco Secure Firewall to be that it serves its purpose. ASA is nice, but it is outdated now. When it comes to FTD, complexity is one of the things. I am not sure they should build it from scratch.

Cisco Secure Firewall has helped improve my company over the last 15 years. Nowadays, you cannot live without a firewall. We are currently moving to another vendor.

Navigating through Cisco Secure Firewall is not intuitive. Complexity is another significant issue that needs to be addressed.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for 15 years.

Cisco Secure Firewall is working with some bugs and glitches, but it is stable overall. ASA is a super stable firewall, even though it is outdated nowadays. FTD is working fine with some glitches.

Scalability depends on which Cisco Secure Firewall you are buying. For the enterprise level, it is scalable, but not significantly.

I have contacted Cisco support about these issues and opened many TAC cases for the firewalls.

I would evaluate Cisco support as good. Cisco is the best there. However, they need to rebuild this product. I love Cisco products, but when it comes to the firewall, I do not.

We are transitioning to Palo Alto.

I find Palo Alto to be much easier to operate and much more stable. If you want to incorporate FTD with another Cisco product, then you need to go with Cisco to have the full ecosystem. Since we do not have that requirement, we are going to another vendor, which is definitely easier to handle.

I have knowledge about the pricing and licensing.

A couple of days ago, I was working on a project and received a quote for the FTD 1230. For the same level with Palo Alto, even though we had a huge discount with Cisco, it turned out to be more expensive than Palo Alto. The pricing is quite expensive. My overall review rating for this product is 6.

My main use cases for Cisco Secure Firewall are to help secure the network and control what we allow in and out of the network.

The benefits of Cisco Secure Firewall's features for my company include giving us more visibility into what's going on when there's either an attack or just normal traffic, allowing us to see what's going through it.

The feature of Cisco Secure Firewall that I appreciate the most is the central management. The central management feature makes it easier to configure once, push out, and replace firewalls when they go bad. It's nice to have one pane of view, one pane of glass. 

I assess Cisco Secure Firewall's ability to unify policies across my environment as definitely easy. We just do it through the one central management and then push it out from there. It is important for our organization to have such a feature. The importance of this feature lies in that it just helps standardize our configuration approach, allowing us to ensure that our ideas get pushed out to everything.

Cisco Secure Firewall could be improved by providing more visibility, especially regarding encryption, to be able to see what's in those traffic flows. More application visibility would also help; it knows about certain types of traffic yet not everything. It would be awesome if it knew everything. 

To make Cisco Secure Firewall a better product or a perfect product, visibility is a good improvement area. You sort of have to know the product to use it, so user and technical improvements should aim for simplicity. There's so much it does that I don't know how much more simple it could go, so I'm not sure what really could be improved.

My impression of Cisco Secure Firewall's visibility and control capabilities in managing encrypted traffic is that somewhat limited. Most tools seem to be limited on encrypted traffic, so we don't get too much visibility into it—just the general type of traffic, not too much more than that.

We've been using the solution for at least 15 years.

The stability and reliability of the Cisco Secure Firewall platform are very good; it's rock solid and has always just done its work.

Cisco Secure Firewall is growing and handling everything we ask it to do, so it's performing that part effectively.

I evaluate customer service and technical support of Cisco overall as good; it's definitely one of the better companies to work with.

Positive

While using Cisco Secure Firewall, we did consider other solutions. We recently upgraded all of them to the latest edition of Cisco, and we looked at Palo Alto and other tools at that time, but those firewalls have been in place for about 15 years. I don't know what happened when we initially put them in, but we did do an evaluation three years ago and decided to stay with Cisco.

The deployment seems to go well. I'm not the one personally doing it. That said, the guys I tell to do it get it done when we need it done.

I don't see a return on investment with Cisco Secure Firewall; it's more of a needed tool, just something we need to do to get business done, so I'm not really looking at it as a tool that would give us an ROI.

My experience with the pricing, the setup cost, and the licensing of Cisco Secure Firewall has been what I expect; I'd always prefer it cheaper, but nothing too exorbitant.

Familiarity was the biggest reason for staying with Cisco; everybody knows how to use the Cisco CLI, so it wasn't worth the effort to swap out, as there were no big benefits from other solutions.

I'm not sure if there are any new features or functionalities that I have tried recently in Cisco Secure Firewall; it's just been doing its work for a while now. 

I don't really use a cloud-delivered firewall as of today, so the only effect of not looking at it is speed. We're looking for the best performance we can get, and cloud usually isn't that. Cisco Secure Firewall helps us along the path to implementing a zero-trust security model, but there are a lot of tools and different paths to cover, so it's just really one tool in the arsenal.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cisco Secure Firewall an eight.

We are deploying Cisco Secure Firewall for customers in the cloud, on-premise, or all around, depending on the customer. We have small customers that are migrating to the cloud, so we have to deploy virtual firewalls as well as on-premise solutions for both large-scale and small-scale operations.

The best return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is the visibility. From my point of view, the best return on investment is the visibility. With Firepower Management and the FMC, you are able to really see everything that's going on in your network.

From my point of view, the stability and reliability of the product is quite good. The firewall sensors and the management are quite stable. We are encountering some problems, but mostly when you implement the solution correctly, you don't have any problems besides hardware failure, which is really rare. 

Scalability for Cisco Secure Firewall is a good point. It's hard to say because mostly we are consulting and planning together with the customer. If they can see upfront or if they know when they have to scale big, then we can scale with them. I think the appliances are well scaled for the use of the customer.

I have a lot of experience with the customer service and technical support of Cisco. Recently, we managed to get one of the Cisco engineers to connect with us to solve some customer problems.

My experience with the customer service and technical support of Cisco is quite excellent. The engineers are top-notch and they know what they are doing. They are really experts in their field.

Regarding customer service, I'm not as familiar with that aspect. However, with the technical support, when you know the right people and when you really have problems which you can't solve on your own, they are behind you and they can help you mostly.

Negative

I have worked with other solutions in the past, different ones. The vibe which is in Cisco equipment caught me from the early days. When I started, the first security appliance I saw was Cisco PIX. I worked sometimes with Cisco ASA, and this was all before I came to Bechtle. Now I'm where I want to be.

Deploying Cisco Secure Firewall is getting easier, so I would describe the experience as straightforward. You are now able to preconfigure the appliances to send out, so you don't need engineers on site. In some cases, you can preconfigure and send it to the customer, and the customer is able to plug it in and it has access to WAN or to the internet. You are up and can run the system. I would rate Cisco Secure Firewall overall as an eight or a nine out of ten.

This is mostly the system I'm working with, so I do work with other solutions other than Cisco Secure Firewall, but we do have other teams working with other vendors. We are at a point where things are getting more and more complicated and you need more and more knowledge to do the implementation correctly. My goal is to do Cisco and to do it the best I can and do it properly.

I'm mostly on the implementation side, so pricing, the setup cost, and the licensing are not really my part in the business. I hear it's quite expensive, but the service you get is worth it. When you invest so much, you will get a lot of service. About licensing, I don't have experience with other vendors regarding licensing, so I would say the licensing is quite good. I'm not sure if there are any other downsides, so I consider it acceptable.