No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure Firewall vs Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs Trellix Intrusion Prevention System comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Mindshare comparison

Firewalls Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Firewall7.7%
Fortinet FortiGate14.0%
OPNsense7.9%
Other70.4%
Firewalls
Firewalls Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall1.0%
Fortinet FortiGate14.0%
OPNsense7.9%
Other77.1%
Firewalls
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Trellix Intrusion Prevention System2.9%
Darktrace10.1%
Fortinet FortiGate8.5%
Other78.5%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

RajeshKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Consultant at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified policies have strengthened zero-trust demos and automate rapid threat containment
Feedback and Improvement Areas – Cisco Secure Firewall (Customer Perspective) From a customer point of view, there are a few improvement areas observed while positioning Cisco Secure Firewall in competitive scenarios. 1. Dashboard & Visibility Enhancements Customers often compare firewall dashboards across different OEMs during evaluation. * Competing vendors typically provide more feature-rich and visually detailed dashboards. * There is a perception that Cisco dashboards still require enhancement in terms of visualization, consolidated reporting, and built-in analytics. * Some OEMs advertise additional security capabilities clearly within their publicly available data sheets, making competitive positioning easier. In comparison, Cisco sometimes references separate documentation or explains how certain capabilities (such as anti-spam or antivirus functionality) can be achieved through integration or ecosystem components rather than native, built-in features. This creates a perception gap during customer discussions. Improvement Opportunity: * Enhance dashboard capabilities. * Clearly articulate feature availability in public documentation and data sheets. * Reduce dependency on cross-referenced documentation for commonly compared features. 2. Virtual Firewall / Multi-Instance Capabilities in Lower Models Another competitive challenge relates to virtual firewall capabilities. * Several OEMs provide virtual firewall (VDOM-like) functionality in lower-end models. * In Cisco’s portfolio, multi-instance capability typically starts from higher-end platforms such as the 3K series or higher. * Customers looking for smaller deployments with logical segmentation are often forced to consider higher models, resulting in a price jump. Competitors also offer: * Compact hardware models * Dongle-based firewall appliances * Smaller entry-level products with virtual segmentation In Cisco’s case: * To achieve similar multi-instance functionality, customers must opt for higher-tier models. * This creates a significant pricing gap in entry-level or SMB deployments. This pricing difference becomes a key factor when customers compare solutions. If competitors offer a lower-cost model with virtual segmentation, and Cisco requires a higher platform investment, customers may lean toward alternative OEMs. 3. Documentation Gaps – OT Protocol Visibility In our lab environment, we have deployed Cisco Secure Firewall and are using Application Visibility and Control (AVC) for OT network monitoring. Observations: * OT protocols are clearly visible within application visibility. * The firewall successfully identifies and classifies OT traffic. However: * This capability is not clearly mentioned in publicly available documentation. * When a feature is available and functional, it should be explicitly documented in data sheets and feature guides. The need for third-party integration depends on what we are looking for. Here I am saying that the integration with Cisco NAC can be done because RTC functionality is only available with Cisco ISE and the firewall integration. For other ecosystems, if we use a NAC solution that is not Cisco, we can still integrate it for user authentication, such as with VPN user authentication. But in that case, we don't achieve the same functionality, such as RTC with other NAC solutions. This is one aspect. Another part is that if we are using it, it always happens with some NAC solutions because we have Cisco NAC and Cisco firewall; we want consistent policy across the network, whether the user is on-prem or using VPN services. If this is a unified OEM solution, in that case, we require an agent, such as the Cisco Secure Client. That allows us to easily check the posture status of the remote user and connect to the network effortlessly. But if we are using a third-party solution, we can't achieve that. From a SIEM perspective, certain prerequisites must be fulfilled before integration with Cisco Secure Firewall can be completed. The feasibility of integration depends on the capabilities of the SIEM platform. If the SIEM solution supports the required APIs and event handling mechanisms, similar functionality can be achieved. Therefore, integration itself is generally not the challenge; the key consideration is the desired security outcome within the overall ecosystem. If the customer does not have a SIEM solution and intends to automate quarantine actions or enforce restricted access for users, a Network Access Control (NAC) solution becomes mandatory. In this scenario, the recommended NAC solution is Cisco Identity Services Engine (Cisco ISE). Automated quarantine and dynamic access control workflows are dependent on NAC capabilities. From a feature enhancement perspective for Cisco Secure Firewall, deeper NAC-driven integration adds significant value. 1. TrustSec / Tag-Based Policy Enforcement Cisco ISE supports Cisco TrustSec, which enables Security Group Tag (SGT)-based segmentation. * In traditional (legacy) networks, firewall policies are created based on IP addresses. * With TrustSec, policies are defined based on user identity, group membership, and security tags instead of IP subnets. * When users authenticate to the network, Cisco ISE assigns Security Group Tags (SGTs). * These tags are shared with Cisco Secure Firewall. * The firewall then enforces policies based on SGT-to-SGT rules rather than IP-to-IP rules. Benefits: * Significant reduction in the number of firewall rules * Simplified policy management * Improved scalability * Easier implementation of role-based access control This integration enhances operational efficiency and security posture. 2. Rapid Threat Containment (RTC) Another key capability is Rapid Threat Containment (RTC). If Cisco Secure Firewall detects malicious activity—such as malware download attempts identified via signature-based or advanced threat detection—it can notify Cisco ISE about the compromised endpoint. Based on this input: * Cisco ISE can automatically quarantine the user * The endpoint can be moved to a restricted VLAN * Access can be dynamically limited without manual intervention This automated workflow ensures faster response time and reduces the risk of lateral movement within the network. 3. VPN and Posture Assessment This functionality is not limited to wired or LAN users. For VPN users: * Authentication can be integrated with third-party NAC solutions. * However, if posture assessment (device compliance checking) is required in addition to authentication, Cisco ISE integration with Cisco Secure Firewall becomes essential. Cisco ISE enables: * Endpoint posture validation * Dynamic policy assignment * Automated remediation workflows
Ajit Pratap Kundan - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Solution Consulting at Accops Systems Pvt Ltd
Unified security management has improved traffic control and simplified remote workforce access
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall does help in vulnerability identification and response by providing a single unified console through which I am able to monitor and manage infrastructure. The URL filtering capability of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall helps in blocking malicious sites. We have to take care of both known threats and unknown threats. The firewall takes care of known threats, and we protect ourselves from unknown threats such as malicious code and malware that we cannot create firewall rules for. With these routing capabilities and policies, only whitelisted things get processed or passed. The biggest advantages of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall, especially as a partner, service provider, and integrator, are that it is very easy to integrate these APIs with our solution, and most of the features I am getting in the clientless mode. Even with the client mode, it is easy to integrate with our client, allowing the customer to get a single client to address all the features of the firewall as well as the GTNA perspective. The flexibility of deployment, especially for the government and defense sectors, is that they want an on-premises solution, while the rest of the PSUs or enterprise segment are comfortable with the cloud offering, which is the SaaS offering and the way to go in the future.
BS
Large account Manager at Softcell Technologies Limited
Has offered reliable threat protection and detailed network insights but could expand features beyond existing capabilities
The best features of Trellix Intrusion Prevention System include advanced ATP (Advanced Threat Protection), which uses signatures, behavior analysis, and machine learning to stop zero-day exploits and malware advanced persistent threats (APTs). They track and collect data from APTs, which allows them to track malicious files entering the environment. The system offers inline prevention and real-time automatic blocking of malicious packets before they reach the network. It integrates with the Trellix ecosystem and provides application visibility and control. The solution provides deep insight into network traffic, applications, and protocols for better information. All packets coming through the application are analyzed and reported. They share intelligence updates regularly to protect from different malicious files and sector-specific threats. It supports both on-premise and cloud environments.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"With Cisco, there are a lot of features such as the network map. Cisco builds the whole network map of the machines you have behind your firewall and gives you insight into the vulnerabilities and attributes that the host has. Checkpoint and Fortinet don't have that functionality directly on the firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the security that it provides our company and users."
"Cisco’s AnyConnect SSL VPN is by far the best client VPN technology I’ve ever had to deploy and manage."
"Cisco Secure Firewall scales incredibly well with our growing needs."
"It has enhanced the security in every network over time."
"The solution is excellent for enterprise-level networks."
"For clean and easy protection of an enterprise, it is a really good product."
"It has improved our organization's security posture dramatically and has definitely given us modern protection and peace of mind in terms of attacks against our infrastructure from known or emerging threats, so we can be protected against them."
"The VPN is great."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is very simple, easy to use, and flexible."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall has impacted my organization positively by making it very easy to work and offering a more competitive price compared to other vendors."
"The technical support for Forcepoint is fine, they are polite and available twenty-four hours and usually resolve problems the same day."
"We find the product to be stable and reliable in terms of performance."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is quite affordable, cheaper than other brands like Palo Alto or Check Point, with a lot of capabilities, very stable, and very well-made, making it a really good product for its price when compared to other vendors."
"Forcepoint has great security functionality."
"The most valuable features in Trellix for me are the automated signature updates. It is a great and convenient feature."
"The solution is very stable, reliable, and free of bugs or glitches, and it does not crash or freeze."
"Great monitoring feature."
"The product is worth the investment."
"It improved my security by stopping an attack to the signature base, or the behavior base."
"The most valuable features are the customization of the signature and the unlimited amount of custom signatures in IPS."
"The feature I found most valuable is the network threat analyzer in the security platform. It also integrates with GTI, or Global Threat Intelligence. Otherwise, I just use the basic features."
"Overall the solution is very good. It offers great protection and gives us a good overview of what is on the network."
 

Cons

"One of the few things that are brought up is that for the overall management, it would be great to have a cloud instance of that. And not only just a cloud instance, but one of the areas that we've looked at is using an HA type of cloud. To have the ability to have a device file within a cloud. If we had an issue with one, the other one would pick up automatically."
"The former ASA was a pain in the ass because when someone is used to the Cisco way, the ASA was a strange thing."
"The cost is very high. Most organizations cannot afford it."
"When Cisco acquired Sourcefire and turned it into Firepower, it was a very problematic device."
"Its interface is sometimes is a little bit slow, and it can be improved. When you need to put your appliance in failover mode, it is a little difficult to do it remotely because you need to turn off the appliance in Cisco mode. In terms of new features, it would be good to have AnyConnect VPN with Firepower. I am not sure if it is available at the moment."
"It doesn't have a proper GUI to do troubleshooting, so most people have to rely on the command line."
"Price maybe..."
"Cisco Secure Firewall has some growth opportunities in terms of visibility and control capabilities regarding managing encrypted traffic."
"It is a helpful feature, but it is not a user-friendly solution as a whole."
"The solution's support could use improvement."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall could change its interface, allowing standard or direct connect modes to be configured."
"The interface is complicated. It's difficult to locate all the necessary menus and functions."
"Making this solution easier to use would be an improvement. The implementation could be made easier."
"While the policies are easy to read, the UI feels a bit dated and sometimes clunky on certain pages."
"The company should update the URL filtering database. They need to enhance the URL filtering and make it easier to customize."
"Something that I've noticed that Forcepoint lacks, is the training that they offer to their end-customers"
"The pricing could be improved."
"We would like to have a simpler version. Some settings and functions on the McAfee console are complex and complicated. I want the management console to be simpler."
"In terms of high-security attacks, not all of them are developed. You cannot do a rule that includes all high severities."
"There are limited resources for configuration guidance."
"The Network Security Managers could be more stable, agile, and work faster. When it comes to instability, there is room for improvement."
"I haven't seen threat intelligence and machine learning for predictive threat analysis in the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System yet."
"Currently, the settings and confirmations on the McAfee console are complex and complicated for our branches."
"The management component could be simplified."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is not too high, but the subscription is a little bit high. We compared the activation of Cisco and Fortinet, and when we activated the whole portfolio of the UTM of Fortinet, the speed reduced. We tested the same situation with the Cisco 2140 series, and there was no reduction in speed."
"The ROI is good. Using ASA, we have saved 10% to 20% on our costs."
"The pricing could always be cheaper."
"The price is comparable."
"We pay about €2,000 ($2,400 USD) per year for licensing."
"Acquiring licensing for Cisco Secure Firewall can be a bit cumbersome, therefore a more straightforward licensing process would be preferable."
"Although I am not directly involved in dealing with the pricing aspect of the Cisco Secure Firewall, I know that the licensing has improved over the years."
"Our subscription costs, just for the firewalls, is between $400,000 and $500,000 a year."
"Next Generation Firewall is moderately priced."
"The cost is fair, but it could be improved."
"I believe the licensing fee is for one year, three years, and five years, or something like that. If you wants to increase the support level from a simpler level to platinum, I think that there's a cost. There are differences between every kind of support, but I don't know the numbers."
"It requires a yearly subscription."
"We would love to take other solution from Forcepoint, but unfortunately the price is too high. That's why we are not considering using Forcepoing for our proxy and DLB. They have a very good DLB, but the matter in the end is the cost."
"It is expensive."
"I consider Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall's price to be good."
"There is a need to make payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. The product is not expensive."
"The tool is competitively priced."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at Webernetz.net - Network Security Consulting
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business195
Midsize Enterprise130
Large Enterprise239
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...
Which is better - Fortinet FortiGate or Cisco ASA Firewall?
One of our favorite things about Fortinet Fortigate is that you can deploy on the cloud or on premises. Fortinet Fort...
How does Cisco's ASA firewall compare with the Firepower NGFW?
It is easy to integrate Cisco ASA with other Cisco products and also other NAC solutions. When you understand the Cis...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall?
In terms of price, I would say Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is not expensive. It is very much comparable to ot...
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall?
The negative side of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is that the ZTNA part is missing. For that, we have to integ...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall?
The major use cases for Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall are in government turnkey projects where we require a lot...
What needs improvement with McAfee Network Security Platform?
Trellix Intrusion Prevention System does not provide virtual patching. Patching involves updates on the OS side to ad...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Network Security Platform?
We do not use Trellix Intrusion Prevention System; rather, we sell the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System solution. ...
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Network Security Platform?
I have experience working with other tools, specifically Trellix solutions such as DLP, EDR, and MDR, as well as with...
 

Also Known As

Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Cisco Secure Firewall ASA Virtual - BYOL
Forcepoint NGFW, Stonesoft Next Generation Firewall, McAfee Network Security Platform, Intel Security Network Security Platform
McAfee Network Security Platform, McAfee NSP, IntruShield Network Intrusion Prevention System, IntruShield Network IPS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
Desjardins Group, HollyFrontier, Nubia, Agbar, WNS Global Services, INAIL, Universidad de Las Américas Puebla (UDLAP), Cook County, China Pacific Insurance, Bank Central Asia, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, City of Chicago, Macquarie Telecom, Sutherland Global Services, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, United Automotive Electronic Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Netgate, Cisco and others in Firewalls. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.