Cisco Secure Firewall Reviews

It's primarily for managing our employees. So far, it has been working great. We don't have many problems.

It gives us all the features that we need.

We can shift traffic, block certain content, or redirect policies.

We would like to see MS Word BPM as a feature. 

We don't use the technical support too much. It is not good, especially for Latin America. Therefore, we employ people who have skills or certifications, using them for technical support.

We started with Cisco Firepower.

It was a bit complex to set up. However, after some practice, it was not too difficult.

It is a great solution for medium or big enterprises, not so much for small businesses, mainly due to the financial costs. Cisco Firepower is a great solution, but it is expensive compared to others that can provide similar benefits for much less.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Quality of the product
• Cost.

The gateway firewall is where we use it the most.  

The firewall and policy side are easy to use. 

IDS.

Make the IPS baked-in. It is a good firewall, though not NextGen.

We use it as a perimiter firewall and do VPNs and filtering.

As a reseller, because Cisco includes different companies like Sourcefire, Meraki, and Talos, I think Cisco has a good portfolio for the security business, with their own devices too. For example, we have our firewall, we have a Web security appliance, things like OpenDNS with Umbrella. I think Cisco can cover with all the platforms.

All the visibility the device gives us as well as management and administration facilities.

It needs better documentation for when we present solutions to non-technical people. They need to bring together all the information, across the various firewalls, so that we can more clearly explain them.

Also, pricing could be better.

It's very stable. 

When we implement a firewall we need to be aware of whether it is growing over a short time period or a long time period. I think the scalability, from our implementation, is good because you can use the same configuration for another platform. If you implement on a small platform, it It is easy to implement the same configuration to another, bigger device.

I think tech support is a large part of Cisco. It's good, it provides support around the clock, answers problems. I would rate it nine out of 10.

SonicWall.

For some things it is very easy, but configuring other things is a little complex. It depends on the use case.

Cisco may be a little expensive but it has everything, and they support very well.

Juniper, Fortinet.

I think Cisco has all the solutions: switching, routing, security, they have wireless. You can cover all the devices with Cisco. They have all the network and engineered tools to help resolve the issues that we have. They are really very good devices.

In terms of advice, I would say Cisco is the best company. They're very stable, there aren't too many issues. And when there is an issue they have many engineers who can solve the problem.

VPNs, reliability.

Connectivity with client Telcos works perfectly way and administration is simple.

I think it's the perfect Firewall for SME.

Five years.

No.

No.

10 out of 10.

Version 5515 is better than 5510 or 5505.

If you know how to use Cisco IOS, it's easy. Otherwise, you will find no way
of configuring it with ease.

Go for the complete bundle, it's a one time investment only. Otherwise, in the future you will have to buy other tools as licenses for some add-on services.

FortiGate 100D.

I would go for bundle licenses and hire a Cisco engineer for implementation.

It's a great solution that amalgamates a firewall and VPN into one device. It also has a well organized GUI- ASDM.

• Easy to setup VPNs
• Firewall ACL
• Easy to modify
• Easy to perform maintenance

The ADSM is incompatible with different versions of Java.

I've used it for six years.

I have issues with some versions of Java and ASDM.

It's high.

It's high.

I used a Cisco 881 router as a firewall and VPN solution. ASA allows conformity and various amounts of functionality in work.

It can be complex, since a lot of CLI commands are different with respect to the CLI of IOS routers.

We implemented ASA without vendor support. For first time implementation, it is good to have someone with ASA experience involved.

Prices could be a little bit lower to make the product more accessible.

The fact that it's a full inspection firewall.

In fact there is no relevant improvement, but this is the kind of device that every company must have.

• Recognition of appliances
• UTM features

I've used it for five years.

It was mainly issues regarding the management and VPN setup.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

8/10.

8/10.

We previously used IPtables, and switched because there was a lack of technical support, RMA, etc.

It was an easy initial set-up.

We did it in-house.

No other options were looked at.

We are a solution provider and Cisco NGFW is one of the products that we implement for our clients. My clients use it for internet access within the enterprise.

I like the firewall features, Snort, and the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS). 

This product is managed using the Firepower Management Center (FMC), but it would be better if it also supported the command-line interface (CLI). Cisco's FTD devices don't support the command-line interface and can only be configured using FMC.

We have been using this product for the past four years.

This is a stable product and we plan to continue implementing it for clients in the future.

Cisco NGFW is a scalable firewall. My client has more than 100 users.

We have support from Cisco's TAC, the Technical Assistance Center, and they support this product well. We haven't had any issues with them.

Prior to the Next Generation firewall, my clients were using Cisco ASA for more than 10 years.

The initial setup is easy, with the installation and configuration taking about two hours.

I did the deployment myself.

This product requires licenses for advanced features including Snort, IPS, and malware detection.

In summary, this is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I have deployed Cisco ASA as a terminator firewall. Normally, I would have preferred to have a sandwich configuration for firewalls: One possible firewall that would make an internal firewall and another for an external firewall. 

Cisco ASA is best suited for our external firewall protection.

• Its VPN and ASN features are very stable. 
• It is easy to configure. 

In terms of next-generation capabilities, Cisco is a little behind. It is way behind leaders like Palo Alto, Check Point and Fortinet. While Cisco is headed in the right direction, it will take several years for it to get there.

When I need support, Cisco has provided quality support. I like working with them because of their support system.

The setup was straightforward. I was happy with the configuration and deployment of the solution, as it was quick.