We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and McAfee StoneGate [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"Whenever we raise a complaint with FortiGate, their response and resolution times are minimal."
"UTM/NGFW features and FortiCloud for logs and backups are awesome."
"Fortigate's most valuable feature is that it doesn't need a push policy when writing rules."
"The solution is highly scalable because they have devices that can handle a large amount of traffic."
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"It allowed us to consolidating multiple security devices into a single appliance."
"Cisco Secure Firewall made it easier so that more than one person can handle things. We are able to have a bigger team that can handle simple tasks and have a smaller team focus on the deep-dive needs."
"I love the ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager) which is the management suite. It's a GUI and you're able to see everything at a glance without using the command line. There are those who love the CLI, but with ASDM it is easier to see where everything is going and where the problems are."
"The customer service/technical support is very good with this solution."
"You can also put everything into a nice, neat, little package, as far as configuration goes. I was formerly a command-line guy with the ASA, and I was a little nervous about dealing with a GUI interface versus a command line, but after I did my first deployment, I got a lot more comfortable with doing it GUI based."
"The stability is very good; there's no vagueness. Either it works or it doesn't, and it's also very easy to find out why."
"The feature my customers find the most valuable is the exportability."
"The solution is excellent for enterprise-level networks."
"It works well with a highly-active cluster."
"We did not have issues with scalabiliy."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the protection, it did not prevent us from being attacked. Additionally, Fortinet FortiGate could provide more features for WAF devices. I should not have to purchase two solutions, it would be a benefit to combine these features into one solution."
"It would be nice if backups could more easily migrate between different models."
"It could use more templates for third-party site-to-site VPN setups other than FortiGate and Cisco."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"The logging details need to be improved."
"It could use a web-based portal for VPN. Earlier they had it in the ASA model, but currently they don't have it."
"It is hard to collaborate with our filtered environment."
"Antivirus features must be integrated for end user security."
"The central management tool is not comfortable to use. You need to have a specific skill set. This is an important improvement for management because I would like to log into Firepower, see the dashboard, and generate a real-time report, then I question my team."
"Cisco provides us with application visibility and control, although it's not a complete solution compared to other vendors. Cisco needs to work on the application behavior side of things, in particular when it comes to the behavior of SSL traffic."
"It is surprising that you need to have a virtual appliance for the Firepower Management Center. It is not good if you have to setup a VMware server just for it."
"The relatively new Firepower Threat Defense image (mix of ASA and Sourcefire network security) fills a lot of gaps and features that were missing on ASA."
"Setting firewall network rules should be more straightforward with a clearer graphical representation. The rule-setting method seems old-fashioned. The firewall and network rules are separate from the Firepower and web access rules."
"After some experience with the solution, we had to do some redesign, but generally, we were happy with the product."
Earn 20 points
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while McAfee StoneGate [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while McAfee StoneGate [EOL] is rated 7.0. 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 McAfee StoneGate [EOL] writes "The HA cluster had issues during deployment, but the solution gives us better application control than with our previous solution". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas McAfee StoneGate [EOL] is most compared with .
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.