We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center and Palo Alto Networks Panorama based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"One of the most valuable features of Cisco Secure Firewalls is their seamless integration with other Cisco products."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I like its system management and filtering options as a layer seven firewall."
"The applied policy inside the firewall is good."
"It's a fine solution in terms of scalability."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the intrusion prevention system."
"The most valuable features are the Virtual Private Network and the Electronic Control Lists."
"The most valuable aspect of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for me is the centralized management of multiple firewalls."
"A valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is reporting because it gives you different reports on data, logs, and threats. I also like the centralized firewall management feature of the product."
"The entire ease of use is most valuable. If you're managing firewalls locally with PAN-OS, the look and feel of Panorama is the same. So, you don't have to relearn another product. If you're used to managing firewalls from Palo Alto, you can easily use Panorama to manage them. It looks and feels the same."
"Panorama is very easy, easy to administrate, and easy to control."
"The product was great, and whenever there was a bug or issue, they released updates quickly. Additionally, their support was very good."
"Templates and the possibility to apply a configuration to many devices at the same time are the most valuable features. We are able to create templates, and we don't need to go to each firewall to make changes. We can make changes in Panorama, and it automatically applies those changes to all those firewalls on which we want to apply the changes. It provides centralized management."
"The solution is absolutely stable."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the ability to manage our devices centrally. Additionally, we can monitor the workforce connections, receive reports, and use the backup feature."
"The IOS and the deploy option could be improved."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center's logging functionality could be improved."
"The performance of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could be improved."
"The solution should improve the user interface."
"It's not very user-friendly and can be somewhat disorganized."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Some duplicated values and security standards are not working in some high-application protocols with Cisco's next-generation firewalls."
"The interface is an area that could be improved."
"There is a need to improve the upgrade process. When we are upgrading the solution we are facing some issues with Elasticsearch services. Every time we upgrade it takes a long time to become stable."
"A bottleneck in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the licensing. The licensing model for the product is complicated. Another area for improvement is the PDF report generation because you'll notice that it's missing some details."
"There is room for improvement in the integration within endpoint detection. They need to do some integration between endpoints and the firewalls."
"The solution's utilization of network ports makes things as complex as possible."
"Storage in Palo Alto Networks Panorama needs improvement. My company also experienced deployment issues when the product was first installed, particularly when binding with the firewall. It's not as user-friendly because not everyone can deploy it without some knowledge."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama currently lacks the capability of integrating with other software, such as AlgoSec to simplify rule management and schedule management. However, this feature has been requested by the company and it is uncertain if Palo Alto will implement it in the future. Additionally, the UI needs improvement, it is too slow."
"We have had some issues in the past because integrating a new device is not intuitive."
"It is not a cheap product."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is ranked 7th in Firewall Security Management with 18 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is ranked 3rd in Firewall Security Management with 80 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center writes "A stable and reasonably priced product that protects organizations from malware". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama writes "Built-in proxy with the ability to maintain your own policies". Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager and FireMon Security Manager, whereas Palo Alto Networks Panorama is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, AlgoSec, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud and Tufin Orchestration Suite. See our Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.
