- VPN
- ASDM configuration
For FirePOWER:
- IPS
- AMP
- URL filtering
For FirePOWER:
It's pretty easy to connect between different branches using site to site VPN.
Cost, it's very expensive. To migrate from a Cisco ASA 5550 and not drop in performance, you have to go to a Cisco ASA 5555-X with FirePOWER. To fully use the Cisco FirePOWER IPS, AMP and URL filtering, you are forced to (MUST) buy the Cisco FireSIGHT management centre. You also have to buy licensing for Cisco AnyConnect VPN client
I've been using it since October 2004, so for 10 years.
Due to the cost, I am still waiting for more funds to deploy the final phase, FirePOWER IPS, AMP and URL filtering.
Cisco did an upgrade from v8.2 to v8.3 of the migration system. NAT configuration is different from 8.2 to 8.3. It's not easy to upgrade to 8.3 and above leading to running different software versions.
V8.2 is very stable. With the latest versions it's still early to tell.
Upgrading from v8.2 to v8.3 is a nightmare. The risks of down time are so high that I am forced to run different versions. Stay with 8.2 on all NAT dependent on your ASA, but again it's all about the cost.
Excellent customer service. Cisco listens to their customers.
Technical Support:Excellent customer service and documentation.
We previously used Checkpoint, and I switched because Checkpoint was expensive but now it looks like Cisco is following the same route.
It was not that complex because I was using Cisco routers and switches five years prior.
It was an in-house implementation.
I can't tell right now as I am still investing.
The initial investment on the Cisco ASAs was around one million South African Rand and there's a R200,000 annual maintenance cost with Cisco's partners.
No. I went straight to Cisco because of my experience with their CUCM IPT solutions, routers and switches.
Budget a lot of money, especially on the initial setup and the annual licensing and maintenance cost.
Users can VPN into the network from remote locations. It has given us a very robust and well firewalled LAN, that we use for authentication as well for our core network infrastructure.
I've used it for seven years.
No issues encountered.
It's a very stable product.
No issues encountered.
It's good.
Technical Support:It's good.
No previous solution was used.
It was a straightforward setup.
Implementation was in-house as we have Cisco experts.
The initial cost was approximately $6,000.
No other products were evaluated.
ASA is a very reliable product and I have been using it since I cam across it. I strongly recommend the use of the product
The features that we use are:
The ASA gives us a secure appliance at the perimeter and allows us to provide VPN connectivity to our users. We have the ability to control our VPN users as well as use two-factor authentication if needed (using an outside Radius source).
The ASA has room for improvement in the areas of layers four through seven. I would love to see application specific control, e.g.Facebook, Gmail, etc.
I have used this solution for five years.
No issues with the deployment of the ASA as long as you are using it for what it is intended for.
No issues encountered.
As long as you buy the correct model for your company, in regards to throughput, licenses etc., you will be fine.
8/10.
Technical Support:8/10.
I believe it is straightforward, but again it depends on what you are trying to accomplish.
I started to title this a "Review" of the Cisco ASA with FirePOWER, but my objective is to highlight a few limitations of the integrated solution so that potential customers understand the product. It may turn out to be a review after all, but that's the focus.
Let's set some product context. Cisco completed its acquisition of Sourcefire on October 7, 2013, and its initial integration into the Cisco Security family on November 10, 2014. That makes this union very fresh--think of Cisco FirePOWER as newlyweds. They're starting to share the same roof, but carry a lot of individuality and his/her domain around with them.
Next, let's zoom in on the word, "Services", or as you may see elsewhere, "Module". Sourcefire makes a number of standalone, independent intrusion prevention system and application firewall appliances (i.e. 7000 series, 8000 series). When Cisco and Sourcefire united, they introduced the ability to put a dependent Sourcefire module into the Cisco ASA 5500-x next-generation firewall family. One Cisco partner described it as functioning like a virtual machine within the ASA (of sorts). Summation: it needs the host (ASA) to survive.
This "Module" should actually be packaged and marketed as a "Starter Kit" or an entry-level, feature-limited offering (with no building-block upgrade path; it's a hardware ceiling). And perhaps it is by some Cisco VARs, but it's new, so I think many are still coming up to speed with what it brings to the table.
o justify my above assertion, I'll highlight four characteristics that have affected or disappointed me in my deployment, and that have motivated a new set of quotes to move to the hardware/standalone solution.
1. SSL Inspection
Oftentimes you don't know what you don't know and thus you lack the wisdom to ask about it. That was me with this feature. I didn't know that the integrated module only supported a subset of features, so I didn't know to ask about its ability to decrypt inbound SSL traffic.
We host a number of public HTTPS services, though, so one goal of implementing FirePOWER was to protect against intrusion via that conduit.
While reading the Online Help and attempting configuration, I ran across references saying that it was only supported on "Series 3" devices, yet I couldn't quite find how Cisco categorized FirePOWER services. FireSight Management Center (a.k.a. "Defense Center") also gives the illusion of hope in this matter, because it reveals all features as configurable, being that it can manage the largest of Sourcefire appliances. The rubber meets the road, though, when you try to apply a policy with SSL inspection to unsupported devices. And yep, the module is one of those.
Summary: SSL traffic remains cloaked to FirePOWER services. IPS can only treat the headers (read: source/destination IP and port).
2. User Control
This one was less important to me, but still an unfortunate discovery. FirePOWER (all devices) support "User Awareness" through LDAP integration and user agents installed on endpoints, but the ability to control traffic based on the identity of the user as another hardware-only feature. Thus, you can see who is doing what, but control must be applied through hardware or traffic identity, not user.
3. Fail-Close Design
I may butcher the explanation here, but because of the integrated nature of the FirePOWER module and services, if FirePOWER inside of an ASA firewall goes down (crashes, restarts Snort, etc), traffic through the ASA stops. This is regardless of the "sfr fail-open" command, which only practically applies to standalone appliances.
I discovered this with Cisco TAC on a Webex where they put the Sourcefire into software bypass to troubleshoot traffic flow and attempt to take it out of line. That didn't work so well. Alarms and alerts started flying as the ASA clamped down on all new sessions (existing ones seemed to hold--very thankful as I was remote). Anyways, TAC didn't know of this design either until they asked engineering about a potential bug and were told it was "by design".
Major Warning/PSA: Adding FirePOWER Services to your ASA will introduce a new network availability risk. You will be very secure, though, since traffic will stop if the IPS is down. Blessing? Curse? Depends on you.
4. Bug: Active FTP is blocked by FirePOWER Services (CSCze96017)
Cisco was still working on this one when I closed my case regarding it, and their internally-published workaround wasn't accurate at the time. The practical impact, though, is that Active FTP traffic is blocked by Sourcefire due to network address translation (NAT) confusion. The ASA handles it fine, but when the FTP server initiates the new data channel outbound to the client, Sourcefire gets confused and blocks it.
The workaround, which sounds like it may become the "solution" (not fixable), is to deny FTP traffic in your Sourcefire policy:
access-list Outside_SFR extended deny tcp any any eq ftp access-list Outside_SFR extended permit ip any any
class-map Outside-class match access-list Outside_SFR
policy-map Outside-policy class Outside-class sfr fail-open
Note: the last line still contains "sfr fail-open", but it won't apply until we replace the module with the full appliance.
This bug means that Sourcefire cannot inspect or provide any services (not even against IP headers) to FTP traffic. It will not show up in FireSight (Defense Center). Only the ASA will be able to treat it based on standard ACLs, etc.
Alright, let's end on a high note. Apart from those four things, the Cisco ASA with FirePOWER Services solution works well, provides great insight, applies Advanced Malware Protection strongly, and shuts down a ton of illegitimate connections before they can attACK ;).
If you're looking to get your feet wet, and if SSL inspection isn't critical, I recommend giving FirePOWER a shot.
Originally posted at: http://www.thegurleyman.com/shortcomings-of-cisco-asa-5500-x-with-firepower-services/
In our POC we have found that Cisco does not provide Centralized Firewall Policy Manager in cloud. We have to buy appliance only.
The ease of use and ease of deployment were the most important features. As a signature based appliance, SourceFire hits it on the head at detection and capturing traffic, but quite a few of the other IDS/IPS appliances are way too complicated and too time consuming to properly deploy. This will lead to improper deployments and often missing important spots in your network.
Being able to detect intrusions is very valuable, and this can be anything from reconnaissance attacks to malware beaconing from inside our network.
Being able to incorporate third party rules as the SourceFire rules often lag behind current threats. When the latest zero day or other threats hit the market and are high value threats, most departments want to have these signatures available and able to deploy automatically. SourceFire makes this a manual process with third party rules.
I've used it for two years.
No, it was quite easy.
No issues with stability.
The only issue I have is with the price, as SourceFire is VERY expensive.
Customer service is very helpful and there are some extremely knowledgeable people on board.
Technical Support:Very technical! The men and women know what they are doing and are very helpful.
No previous solution was used.
It's straightforward with easy to follow instructions. You just plug-in and go.
I implemented it myself.
Lousy! $250K/year just for maintenance and licensing costs for a defense center and five sensors? This is insane! There is a better way.
The original setup cost was very high, not sure of the exact numbers because this product was purchased prior to me joining, but it was expensive Tack on the recurring charge and this really racks up, but luckily the day to day operational costs aren't bad at all, unless you break out the recurring charge daily!
Other IDS/IPS products were looked at.
The same level of protection can be had at a much lower cost! Look at rolling your own with commodity hardware, Suricata (Or SNORT if you choose, but look at the differences please!), Aanval for the central management and the emerging threats rules.
I use pfSense at home and HIGHLY recommend this over anything else. But for a very distributed environment, checkout Aanval and Suricata combo with rules from Emerging Threats. At my old employer, I developed a plan to replace their $250K/year SourceFire deployment with a $80K/year custom solution that scales much better.
But again, each their own. For small/medium business, I would recommend pfSense, but for larger enterprise, I would recommend a custom solution based around Aanval/Suricata/ETPro with Firewall/VPN as separate devices.
I'm most impressed with the visibility and control SourceFire solutions provide in to the types of traffic flowing in and out of an environment. It makes the discovery of applications and classification of user traffic simple, which in turn allows an organization to more effectively develop security policies and enforce acceptable use for its enterprise users.
I've worked with customers that have dealt with malware issues in the past and preventing its spread laterally within the environment has always been a concern. With SourceFire, we've been able to detect malicious files and stop them at the network edge before internal systems are compromised. Leveraging AMP in addition to FireAMP, which is the endpoint malware solution, is incredibly effective at blocking malware at the host level.The other good news is FireAMP can be leveraged along side traditional endpoint anti-virus software. The Defense Center also provides visibility into how malware is moving within the environment so tracking down infected machines becomes much easier for IT staff.
The overall product line is sound, but I'd like to see a roadmap for SSL decryption as part of the ASA with FirePOWER solution.
I've been working with SourceFire product offerings since Cisco's acquisition of the company in late 2014. Prior to the officially branded Cisco solution, I'd worked with open source Snort in various capacities for several years. I've been using Cisco ASA with FirePOWER services, Cisco SourceFire NGIPS/NGFW most recently.
Learning the advanced capabilities of the system can take time, but it's rather intuitive. I have not encountered issues deploying base functionality with the offerings at this point.
Overall, the systems are stable and IT admins have control in to how the sensors operate within the network in the event of failure.
There are scalability limitations with FirePOWER on the ASA, so determining anticipated throughput requirements is critical. The standalone IPS sensors can be stacked for increased throughput, so depending on your organizations needs, this may be a better path for some organizations concerned about scalability.
8/10.
Technical Support:9/10.
I've used Palo Alto's FW/IPS offerings and Cisco's older IPS platform on the ASA. Usually, I don't decide what organizations purchase, but I am impressed with SourceFire's capabilities over the latter.
Initial set up is straight forward, but there is not much documentation available if you have no experience with the offering. I'd recommend training for all network admins that administer SourceFire systems, especially if you want to leverage some of the advanced features.
Do research in to the types of offerings out there and make a determination of what may be the best fit for your organizations requirements and future security goals.
Hey All,
I am using frotinet porduct for more than 10 years, I am studying to move to Cisco ASA5516 with source power, I would like to know how is it stable against fortigate FG300D
Fortigate firewall throughput numbers are totally different from the Cisco ASA5516,
any help?
The ASDM has significantly improved over the years. Real-time logging and filtering is useful. Firewall rules are easy to understand, and enable/disable.
Change from Java for ASDM to HTML5. Better options to enable/disable site-to-site VPN tunnels.
8 years
The new NAT configuration is difficult to understand especially for people familiar with the pre v8.3 code.
Cisco TAC is good. They will set up a remote viewing session so they can work on the firewall as if they are sitting next to you.
Technical Support:Typically fast and useful.
In-house team.
The multi-context mode.
Being able to use the multi-context on the firewall to keep costs down.
No improvement needed.
I've used it for four years.
Yes but I was able to get the support that was needed to resolve any issues.
No issues encountered.
No issues encountered.
9/10.
Technical Support:8/10.
Yes and we switched because we needed a fully redundant solution.
If you have no experience with the device it may be complex but being trained on the device helps drastically.
We used a mix of both - vendor help and in-house.
We also evaluated Juniper firewalls.
Excellent product and excellent customer support.

Yes, we have 3 x 1Gbps and 1 x 155Mbps. We have four internet breakouts in different cities around the country and three of them are 1Gbps each. The fourth internet breakout is 155Mbps. There's only 2 ASA which are still on 8.3 and all others have been upgraded to 9.1. The remaining two will be upgraded in a few weeks time. Cisco ASAs are reliable, very stable and the best. The Cisco Firepower works like magic, application visibility, URL filtering and the ability to drop p2p protocols like torrent, on the fly are some of the best capabilities of the product.