Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Cisco Sourcefire SNORT 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Network Analytics
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (37th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (9th), Cisco Security Portfolio (9th)
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Network Security Systems solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Secure Network Analytics is designed for Network Monitoring Software and holds a mindshare of 0.9%, down 1.2% compared to last year.
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT, on the other hand, focuses on Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS), holds 3.1% mindshare, up 2.2% since last year.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics0.9%
Zabbix5.7%
SolarWinds NPM3.4%
Other90.0%
Network Monitoring Software
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT3.1%
Fortinet FortiGate13.2%
Darktrace11.5%
Other72.2%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Harun-Owr-Roshid - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at BRIGHT-i SYSTEMS LIMITED
Have streamlined network visibility and troubleshooting while seeing benefits from AI integration
In terms of improvements for Cisco Secure Network Analytics, from the implementation point of view, now that AI is in use, some other features need to be upgraded considering AI solutions. Proper management of the database is also important; it should be centralized for easier data collection from a single database. When precise manual analysis is needed, it's sometimes difficult, so having a centralized database will allow network admins to find actual scenarios more effectively, especially since some information may not be visible on the GUI. Cisco should upgrade their hardware part to run the database, because sometimes it cannot handle the load while all features are running in the network. The database management should indeed be centralized because while AI runs behind the systems, central management is essential. For example, in a network with 100 Cisco switches, a few routers, firewalls, and access points, all data generated should be preserved in a central database. This approach simplifies management and analysis for troubleshooting, as GUI interfaces may not always provide visible information. Centralizing the database will allow for better understanding of which information is preserved for each specific device.
reviewer2772102 - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Architect at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Logging and customizable rules have helped improve threat monitoring and detection
The logging is mainly what I consider one of the best features with Cisco Sourcefire SNORT. Being able to log and store it in a file allows you to push it to a centralized repository. The logging and reporting help improve incident response. You should always be logging threats, any sort of misconfiguration, and anything that could be an issue. It's important to at least log and monitor it. The basic rules provide a good baseline in assessing Cisco Sourcefire SNORT's ability in providing real-time analytics for threat detection, but as a professional, you should look to constantly modify that baseline. They provide extensive customizability so you can define your own rules. The customizability allows it to be adaptable in protecting against diverse network threats to the constant change.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides good visibility to the customers. People are still evaluating it, but it provides visibility and helps them to take action to remediate and mitigate the issues that are highlighted on the dashboard. It has good integration with the Cisco switching platform."
"AI provides suggested common lines and protection features that help safeguard networks from various threats or unwanted situations."
"The most valuable features provided by this solution are visibility and information."
"It has definitely helped us improve our mean time to resolution on network issues."
"The most valuable feature is NetFlow. The beginning of any security investigation starts with NetFlow data."
"The feature most valuable for us is to gain visibility of what is actually floating through, so we can stop it based on whether it's good or bad traffic."
"The search options on Cisco Stealthwatch are the most valuable. You can get very granular with it, down to the kilobits or the seconds if you want. The product supports any time frame that you need, so that is nice."
"Being able to graph and show data to management has improved our organization. We can show the data to the higher-ups. It shows them that it's picking up on these anomalies and doing its job."
"The URL filtering is very good and you can create a group for customized URLs."
"The solution is rather easy to use."
"In general, the features are all great. However, if I need to take hardware for ASA, because they need to upgrade to Firepower, we want to create rules. For that, most of the time we go to the command line. Right now Firepower is working really hard on the grid. You can apply all those rules to the grid. Even if you want to monitor the logs, for example, the activity will tell you which particular user has been blocked because of that rule. Firepower's monitoring interface is very good, because you can see each and every piece. ASA also had it, but there you needed to type the command and be under the server to see all that stuff. In Firepower you have the possibility to go directly to the firewall. The way the monitoring is displayed is also very nice. The feature I appreciate most in Firepower is actually the grid. The grid has worked very well."
"The tool's most valuable feature is threat detection, which is important because we have multiple layers not only in Cisco."
"The solution can be integrated with some network electors like Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco ISE, and Active Directory to provide the client with authentication certificates."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the filtering."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."
"Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
 

Cons

"If they can make this product more web-based, that would be amazing."
"We determined that Stealthwatch wouldn't provide the machine learning model that we required."
"Improvements are needed on the application layer for complete security analysis."
"There's a lot of traffic on our network that we don't see sometimes."
"Reliance on Java. Get away from that."
"Cisco Stealthwatch needs more integration with device discovery. We have to do a lot of hard work to figure out what things are. Better service integration is required."
"It's a good solid solution but integration with Network Access Control products with Cisco ISE would be good."
"The usability of this solution needs to be improved."
"Performance needs improvement."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
"The cloud can be improved."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"The implementation could be a bit easier."
"If the price is brought down then everybody will be happy."
"The main dashboard of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT could improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive. It costs several hundred thousand dollars per year (depending on how many flows you are collecting)."
"NetFlow is very expensive."
"Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside>in traffic."
"Today, we are part of the big Cisco ELA, and it is a la carte. We can get orders for whatever we want. At the end of the day, we have to pay for it in one big expense, but that is fine. We are okay with that."
"We pay for support costs on a yearly basis."
"The yearly licensing cost is about $50,000."
"The licensing costs are outrageous."
"It is worth the cost."
"If one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is cheap, I rate the tool's price as a five."
"Licensing for this solution is paid on a yearly basis."
"I don't know the exact amount, but most of the time when I go to a company with a proposition, they will say, "This thing that you are selling is good, but it's expensive. Why don't you propose something like FortiGate, Check Point, or Palo Alto?" Cisco device are expensive compared to other devices."
"We have a three-year license for this solution."
"The cost is per port and can be expensive but it does include training and support for three years."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
881,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
University
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise52
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Stealthwatch?
Regarding cost, for the Bangladesh context, Cisco Secure Network Analytics is a little bit high-priced because we are a developing country, making it tough to manage affordable solutions. However, ...
What needs improvement with Cisco Stealthwatch?
In terms of improvements for Cisco Secure Network Analytics, from the implementation point of view, now that AI is in use, some other features need to be upgraded considering AI solutions. Proper m...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Stealthwatch?
Our customers mainly use Cisco Secure Network Analytics to get whole network visibility and easy troubleshooting to find actual problems and also to mitigate loopholes or findings immediately to pr...
What do you like most about Cisco Sourcefire SNORT?
The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Sourcefire SNORT?
If one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is cheap, I rate the tool's price as a five. There are some other tools in the market that are more expensive than Cisco. There are no additional c...
What needs improvement with Cisco Sourcefire SNORT?
I have not had much experience with the community-driven rule set while utilizing Cisco Sourcefire SNORT. I don't have experience with recognizing zero-day vulnerabilities, but based on my knowledg...
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
Sourcefire SNORT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
CareCore, City of Biel, Dimension Data, LightEdge, Lone Star College System, National Rugby League, Port Aventura, Smart City Networks, Telecom Italia, The Department of Education in Western Australia
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
881,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.