We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool is a nice product and easy to handle. The software's user interface is also good. You can easily implement remote access in the solution."
"The license management is very valuable. You can get a new license each year, or you can enroll every two to four years. You can get the logs, and you will get the information on the risk in your network and the entire organization. With this information, you can take action on your actives, computers, or devices. You can bring your own device as an SSE."
"In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable."
"The most valuable feature of FortiGate is FortiView which provides proactive monitoring."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution."
"The interface is very user-friendly and I like it very much."
"The Fortinet FortiGate local partners were good. I did not have direct contact with Fortinet support."
"Fortigate's most valuable feature is that it doesn't need a push policy when writing rules."
"AnyConnect has been very helpful, along with the ability to use LDAP for authentication."
"Malicious URLs are being blocked."
"VPN, firewall, and IDS/IPS allow us to deliver services to meet client needs across various industry verticals."
"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."
"Cisco Secure Firewall improved our organization. We have it in every one of our French offices."
"The IP filter configuration for specific political and Static NAT has been most valuable."
"It has definitely improved our organization. It gives us remote connectivity, helps workers connect remotely, and also gives us good connectivity to our other branches."
"If only a Layer 4 FW is needed, this is a good solution."
"The most valuable feature is SD-WAN."
"The people we deal with is a local partner in Cambodia and we can get good support from them."
"Forcepoint is a good, stable solution."
"When comparing this solution to others this one has better reporting, user management, and is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"The VPN is great."
"The feature that we like the most about Forcepoint is that we know the technology and have confidence in it. We can have several functionalities to simplify operations and management. We can combine functionalities like log ownership to review the number of devices in the infrastructure."
"Some of the web policy reports could be improved."
"This product could be improved with Active directory integration and better handling in IPsec and GRE Tunnels."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"I don't really have anything negative to say as far as Fortinet firewalls are concerned. If anything, they can support a user a little bit better. They can stop being so time-sensitive about how much time the support call has taken, and they can help you do it yourself."
"I feel that the reporting needs to be improved."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"We have an issue with hotel guest vouchers."
"The firewall engine is not so strong as of now, in my opinion... My second concern is that, while they have Zero-day vulnerability and anti-malware features, the threat engine needs to be strengthened, its efficiency can be increased."
"We would like to be able to manage a set of firewalls rather than individual firewalls. We haven't really looked into it or yet implemented it, but a single pane of glass would be helpful. We also use another vendor's firewalls, and they have a centralized management infrastructure that we have implemented, which makes it a little bit easier when you're managing lots of firewalls."
"A feature that would allow me to load balance among multiple ISPs, especially since we have deployed it as a perimeter firewall, would be a great addition."
"Initial setup was fairly complex."
"It's not unexpected, but it's a common scenario where customers request dual layers of security. For instance, when dealing with regulatory compliance, especially in financial sectors regulated by entities like the Central Bank, having two distinct units is often mandated. If a client predominantly uses a solution like Palo Alto, they may need to incorporate another vendor such as Cisco or Forti. Importantly, there's a significant disparity in interfaces and management platforms between these vendors, necessitating careful consideration when integrating them into the overall security architecture"
"I have a lot of difficulties with the solution's Firewall Management Center (FMC) and the GUI. Neither is responsive enough and should be improved."
"I would like to see the inclusion of more advanced antivirus features in the next release of this solution."
"I'm not very familiar with the largest Firepower models, but competitors like Palo Alto seem to have a more capable engine to do, for instance, TLS/SSL decryption. As I understand, Firepower doesn't let you export the decrypted traffic so that, for instance, the security department can look at the traffic or inspect traffic. It's all in the box. I've heard rumors that this is something Cisco is working on, but it isn't yet available."
"I don't have any specific improvements to recommend. However, when you compare the throughput of a Cisco firewall to the competitors, especially Fortinet, what you find is that Cisco has lagged a little bit behind in terms of firewall throughput, especially for the price that you pay for that throughput."
"Making this solution easier to use would be an improvement."
"Forcepoint would be improved if there were more training available."
"The optimization is not really ready. If you want very good optimization, you have to add it to the network."
"Forcepoint is a little difficult to configure compared to its competitors."
"They need to increase the local support here. There are also some bugs or fixes on which they need to work. They very well know about these bugs. In terms of licensing, I would like them to either increase the number of features in a single license or make licensing more flexible."
"The solution needs to build upon its network functionality. It needs to be a bit smarter."
"It's a complicated firewall. Until you come to know the firewall inducers, most people don't like the firewall because the components for the firewall are a little bit complex. User-friendliness is a little bit tough. It needs to be user-friendly when creating policies, and pushing policies. Committing takes more time compared to Palo Alto."
"Its interface is complex when compared with a firewall like FortiGate. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall needs a management console, whereas FortiGate doesn't need any console. When you have a few devices, a console is not really necessary. It's good to have a private console only when you have a lot of devices."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 31st in Firewalls with 37 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Good URL filtering with helpful technical support and good scalability". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Juniper SRX Series Firewall, whereas Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Darktrace. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.