We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"The virtual firewall feature is the most valuable. We have around 1,500 firewalls. We did not buy individual hardware, and the virtual firewalls made sense because we don't have to keep on buying the hardware. FortiGate is easier to use as compared to Checkpoint devices. It is user friendly and has a good UI. You don't need much expertise to work on this firewall. You don't need to worry much about DCLA, commands, and things like that."
"The scalability is good in Fortinet FortiGate."
"The ability to set up remote systems is the most valuable feature."
"Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."
"I only deal with it from a security analyst's point of view. I don't really get into the features of the actual FortiGate. From the security point of view, it works, and it does its job."
"It's very easy to configure."
"Being able to determine our active users vs inactive users has led us to increased productivity through visibility. Also, if an issue was happening with our throughput, then we wouldn't know without research. Now, notifications are more proactively happening."
"The initial setup is easy."
"An efficient, easy to deploy and dependable firewall solution."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides."
"We have been using a 5520 for seven years in our datacenter and we are satisfied by this version."
"IPS and Snort are very important because they also differentiate Cisco from other vendors and competitors."
"The remote access, VPN, and ACL features are valuable. We are using role-based access for individuals."
"Cisco ASA is very strong."
"It is a stable solution."
"I like that Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is one hundred percent good, performance-wise."
"Infoblox offers granularity and advanced DNS protection to mitigate DNS attacks. It's a very secure solution."
"The solution helps to identify and mitigate DNS attacks."
"The main advantages with Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection are the dashboards, the reporting system, and they have the GUI interface."
"Grid high availability technology ensured network reliability, resilient network services, failover, recovery, and seamless maintenance."
"Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection allows us to manage our overall addresses and IT in one location. Many companies are using this solution, it is very popular."
"The most valuable features of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection are the services, DHCP, and debugging. Additionally, we can use APIs and ansible scripts."
"This product needs to have an analysis feature, rather than having the analysis done through the integration of a different product."
"The Web-filter in this solution is not very good."
"The integration with third-party tools may be something that they should work on."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"I would like reporting to be improved and should offer a lot more tools to monitor the products."
"The license renewal process, annual renewal price, and the web application firewall features should be improved."
"With FortiGate, the main complaint that I have heard is about the technical support."
"It could also use a reporting dashboard."
"I wouldn't give them a ten. Nobody is perfect. I'll give them a nine because they help me with any issues I've had."
"We have to rely on Cisco ASDM to access the firewall interface. This needs improvement. Because we have a web-based interface, and it is a lot more user-friendly."
"The ability to better integrate with other tools would be an improvement."
"One issue with Firepower Management Center is deployment time. It takes seven to 10 minutes and that's a long time for deployment. In that amount of time, management or someone else can ask me to change something or to provide permissions, but during that time, doing so is not possible. It's a drawback with Cisco. Other vendors, like Palo Alto or Fortinet do not have this deployment time issue."
"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."
"One of my main concerns, an area that could use improvement is in adjusting the need to buy a license to enable features."
"it is not very user-friendly for the administration."
"They are not supporting high query logging. They have a very limited size for the syslog, so they are usually asking for external storage, external network, and integration in order to keep the syslog. If you are considering the high volume traffic of the carrier-grade, then the syslog will hold for around five to 10 minutes. This is not enough time and it is being rotated. This is the main issue and the main limitation that we face with them that they need to work on."
"There needs to be more capabilities in order to configure the console itself instead of the user interface dashboard. Configuring the DNS or DHCP through the console instead of the GUI dashboard would be better."
"There is a steep learning curve to be able to use Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection well."
"The solution's logging could be improved."
"They should release frequent updates for its on-premises version."
"The solution is expensive."
"I think only the technical documentation and administration of box could be a little bit improved."
"The service monitoring information could be simplified of this appliance and the information displayed on the dashboards could be improved. I have not found one dashboard to be perfect. For example, in Splunk, I can create a dashboard in Grafana. However, in Grafana, it takes a very long time to create them. There should be another API to do it better."
More Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is ranked 2nd in Domain Name System (DNS) Security with 12 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is rated 8.2. 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 Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection writes "Stable, with good performance, and has no issues, support-wise". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, F5 BIG-IP DNS, Zscaler Internet Access, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security and EfficientIP DNS Guardian.
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.
