Cisco Secure Firewall Reviews

We are a service provider and we work on a variety of different projects for many customers. We do not use this product ourselves. Rather, we deploy it for different customers.

The primary use case is to protect the organization from unauthorized use.

The most valuable feature is the access control list (ACL).

Report generation is an area that should be improved.

I have been working with this product for two years.

This firewall is quite stable and we use it on a daily basis.

The scalability is good.

I have not worked with equipment from OEMs other than Cisco. It's the only vendor I use.

The initial setup is straightforward. The length of time for deployment depends on whether it is the entire setup or just the basic installation.

I deployed this product myself.

This is a product that I can recommend for an internal firewall. It's good enough.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We have been using this model for three years, to place a firewall between ISPs and our corporate network. As of now, we have configured some SSL VPNs on our end for our convenience.

Three years ago we encountered malicious attacks from the internet, most of which were Chinese attackers, so we deployed Cisco ASA to strengthen our network. Since the deployment, we haven't seen the risk we encountered before.

Manageability of Cisco ASA. It has a GUI interface, unlike the most of Cisco IOS. For beginners they can "sneak in" and apply the command and see the actual commands that the GUI launches. In addition, Cisco has the reputation regarding security.

There are more powerful firewalls, other than the Cisco NGFW, like Fortinet, Palo Alto and so on. I can't say Cisco is the leading firewall brand as of now, as the technology innovates. 

No stability issues yet.

No scalability issues yet.

Awesome.

I rate it an eight out of 10. 

I am only handling or supporting the ASA 5520 model in our company.

• Cisco IPSec VPn
• VPN Client
• Port Restrictions

We could connect data securely from outside the company.

I need application user-IP blocking, Intrusion Prevention, QoS; I can't do these with Cisco and have to change it.

Five years.

No.

No.

I have never needed support from Cisco.

I couldn’t meet all my needs with the Cisco 5505 so I changed it with a next-generation firewall.

Actually it was simple, making port based policies more simple than PA.

Cisco price-performance is very successful.

I evaluated Sophos UTM, Checkpoint, Cisco and PA. PA is the best fit for my company because Sophos acquired Cyberoam and their software wasn’t successful for domain user restrictions. Checkpoint was very slow for me and too many licences and it was complicated. Cisco acquired Sourcefire and they need to improve next-gen features. So I chose PA.

I know that Cisco acquired Sourcefire and they re-introduced next-generation firewall features and I think they’ll improve NX features.

The filter with NAT mode is valuable.

Not really, as we are a subcontractor we install and configure it for other companies.

Speed of execution and security options needs to be improved.

I've used the devices for, more or less, one year.

No issues so far.

No issues so far.

No issues so far.

3.5/5.

3/5.

Yes we did, but we switched due to Ciscos ASA's ability to support big data stream in some networks.

It's not too complex, but it depends on the customers' network architecture.

As a vendor, we find IT experts with CCIE certifications.

I haven't, and my first experience working with ASA, was a project with the specifications already defined

You must specify your needs and choose the right options depending on the network requirements.