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

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs Trellix Intrusion Prevention System comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

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 Sourcefire SNORT
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
16th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Intrusion Preventio...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is 3.5%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Intrusion Prevention System is 3.5%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Trellix Intrusion Prevention System3.5%
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT3.5%
Other93.0%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Jack Poon - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers ease of setup and good documentation
When it comes to the product's deployment phase, we have a lot of vendor support. We have a lot of skills here in Hong Kong. Our company doesn't find any problem deploying Cisco solutions. The solution is deployed on an on-premises version. Speaking about the time required to deploy the solution, I would say that we have quite a lot of previous experience with deploying Cisco products. We have our company's standard design document, which we need to follow. We have a standard testing procedure for all those features. We just take out some appropriate parts and then compile them into one document for an individual project. It is actually quite easy for us to do the documentation, so it just takes one or two hours, and we can do the implementation because all the materials and testing procedures are already in our company standard documents, so it is not that difficult for us.
Daniel_Martins - PeerSpot reviewer
Decade of experience empowers seamless problem resolution and support
I haven't seen threat intelligence and machine learning for predictive threat analysis in the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System yet. For Trellix IPS, AI improvements are an area where it can improve. It's a significant feature. Regarding the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System's flexibility for catering to our organization's specific infrastructure requirements, we have only on-premises and virtual appliances, but it's acceptable. The access and platform could potentially integrate with SaaS. Similar to when you put the EPO in mode integration with SaaS, you can connect with a local credential and with an X Console credential. Another possibility would be to connect with an integration login with the X Console. We have this with EPO on-premise, but with IPS, we don't have it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the filtering."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."
"I like most of Cisco's features, like malware detection and URL filtering."
"The solution is rather easy to use."
"The tool's most valuable feature is threat detection, which is important because we have multiple layers not only in Cisco."
"The whole solution is very good, and stable."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"It simplifies the configuration process by offering pre-defined base configurations, including security and connectivity settings."
"The solution can scale."
"The product is worth the investment."
"McAfee NSP is much more stable than Cisco."
"There's a good dashboard you can drill down into. It helps you easily locate intrusions and the source of attacks."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Overall the solution is very good. It offers great protection and gives us a good overview of what is on the network."
"The most valuable features in Trellix for me are the automated signature updates. It is a great and convenient feature."
"The most valuable features are the customization of the signature and the unlimited amount of signatures in IPS."
 

Cons

"The main dashboard of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT could improve."
"To be frank, the product is not really stable, although they're working on that. Whenever I go to the technical community with an issue, they will usually say that it is not there yet, but the technical team are working on it. The issues are not insolvable. I think they should just keep working on the product to make sure that the product can become very stable. The technical support is great. I appreciate that. We have a lot of communities supporting Firepower now, so you can find help for whatever issue you have."
"The customization of the rules can be simplified."
"Integration with other components — even Cisco's own products — can be enhanced to improve administrative experience."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"The cloud can be improved."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"The implementation could be a bit easier."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Integration with Global Thereat Intelligence could be better. Also, I think management solutions are end of life now at McAfee. Network threat analyzer may be used for endpoint quarantines. Integration between these sides, as well as endpoint APO, will help you quarantine the risky endpoints."
"The pricing could be improved."
"Some of the documentation is not as straightforward as it could be."
"The solution could improve some aspects of detection."
"The Network Security Managers could be more stable, agile, and work faster. When it comes to instability, there is room for improvement."
"There are limited resources for configuration guidance."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a three-year license for this solution."
"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."
"The cost is per port and can be expensive but it does include training and support for three years."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"The tool is competitively priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
867,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

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?
Cisco offers the Cisco DNA Center, which is a source that provides crucial information for us to monitor performance, and see whether there is any trouble. We are using Cisco DNA center, but again,...
What do you like most about McAfee Network Security Platform?
The threat intelligence updates are very accurate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Network Security Platform?
The tool is competitively priced. I rate the pricing a six out of ten.
What needs improvement with McAfee Network Security Platform?
I haven't seen threat intelligence and machine learning for predictive threat analysis in the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System yet. For Trellix IPS, AI improvements are an area where it can impr...
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire SNORT
McAfee Network Security Platform, McAfee NSP, IntruShield Network Intrusion Prevention System, IntruShield Network IPS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
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 Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Trellix Intrusion Prevention System and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.