Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention comparison

Cisco and Palo Alto Networks are both solutions in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category. Cisco is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks is ranked #10 with an average rating of 6.3. Cisco holds a 3.1% mindshare in ID, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 5.6% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Palo Alto Networks users who would recommend it.

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Read 20 Cisco Sourcefire SNORT reviews

1,181 Views
1,004 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Palo Alto Networks Advanced...

Read 29 Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention reviews

3,021 Views
2,356 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Palo Alto Networks Advanced...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention are competing in the cybersecurity space. Palo Alto Networks has an advantage due to its comprehensive threat prevention capabilities.

Features: Cisco Sourcefire SNORT stands out with customizable rules, deep packet inspection, and open-source flexibility. Palo Alto Networks offers integrated threat prevention, combining firewall, antivirus, and threat intelligence, with automated response and real-time updates.

Room for Improvement: Cisco Sourcefire SNORT could benefit from easing its learning curve and enhancing customer support sophistication. Palo Alto Networks might improve by reducing its high initial costs and increasing user accessibility to advanced features without technical expertise.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Sourcefire SNORT offers flexibility but requires a skilled team for deployment and management, with reliable but basic customer service. Palo Alto Networks provides a more streamlined deployment experience with comprehensive support, ideal for less experienced teams.

Pricing and ROI: Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is cost-effective with lower setup costs, appealing for budget constraints while offering satisfactory ROI through flexible implementation. Palo Alto Networks, with higher upfront costs, can achieve greater long-term ROI by effectively reducing incident response costs and operational disruptions.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,986 peers since 2012

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)

14th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Palo Alto Networks Advanced...

Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)

10th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is 3.1%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is 5.6%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention	5.6%
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT	3.1%
Other	91.3%

Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2772102

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.

Read full review

Partha Dash

Global Network Tech Lead at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Advanced protection enables us to confidently secure against evolving threats

Palo Alto Networks can improve Advanced Threat Prevention by catering to the growing adoption of AI and agentic tooling. The Threat Protection modules should have the necessary intelligence to protect against those types of threats, as AI will be there to do a human job; this is an evolving area. From an Advanced Threat Protection perspective, the technology associated with Palo Alto Networks, such as their sandboxing environment, is quite good. However, Palo Alto needs to focus on how to bring that technology to end users and how easy it is to use, especially in a hybrid environment where users work from various locations. While Palo Alto excels in certain setups, they need to improve the user experience in distributed working conditions.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."

"It simplifies the configuration process by offering pre-defined base configurations, including security and connectivity settings."

"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 product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."

"The URL filtering is very good and you can create a group for customized URLs."

"The most valuable features of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT are the dashboard for monitoring events."

"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is easy to configure and the reporting is great. It's also very user-friendly."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the filtering."

More Cisco Sourcefire SNORT pros

"It is a stable product."

"Most of the features of Palo Alto Threat Prevention are alright. I recommend features like content filtering, IP address, & intelligent firewalls. The reporting feature is very good."

"The sandboxing tools offer great prevention for cloud feeds."

"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly, has interesting features, URL filtering, and threat prevention."

"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."

"The initial setup was straightforward. It's quite easy. Deployment took one to two weeks."

"It effectively prevents malware, ransomware, and other attacks."

"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."

More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention pros

Cons

"If the price is brought down then everybody will be happy."

"The implementation could be a bit easier."

"With the next release, I would like to see some PBR, so that you can do the configuration with the features."

"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."

"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."

"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."

"While the alerts they offer are good, it could improve it in the sense that they should be more detailed to make the alerts more useful to us in general. Sometimes the solution will offer up false positives. Due to the fact that the alerts aren't detailed, we have to go dig around to see why is it being blocked. The solution would be infinitely better if there was just a bit more detail in the alert information and logging we receive."

"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT can scale, but if you have too much, you could fill up your log files, which I consider when discussing scalability."

More Cisco Sourcefire SNORT cons

"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."

"The price of licenses should be lowered to make it less costly to scale our solution."

"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower. In comparison with other solutions, I believe they're quite competitive."

"There is a potential drawback with the lack of support for the ICAP protocol."

"The application’s pricing and dashboard need improvement. It could be user-friendly."

"The technology firewall anomaly network could stand improvement."

"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."

"Right now we are focusing on email. If Palo Alto can increase the features related to email filtering and the new malware, it would help us protect our systems."

More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"If one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is cheap, I rate the tool's price as a five."

"If you want to have all of the good features then you have to pay extra for licensing."

"The pricing and the licensing are pretty competitive at this stage. As a reseller, I would like to see the price come down a little bit so I can compete better against other firewalls because we do that all the time."

"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."

"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."

"The product’s pricing is expensive for small companies."

"The pricing could be lower."

"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve by having consistent pricing at system levels."

"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower."

More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

University

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

Government

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	7

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	14

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?

Arbor would be the best bid, apart from Arbor, Palo Alto and Fortinet have good solutions. As this is an ISP, I would prefer Arbor.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?

Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention requires an add-on license and is considered expensive compared to competitors like Cisco AMP and FortiGate ( /products/fortinet-fortigate-reviews ) fi...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?

See all answers

Comparisons

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Compared 15% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Compared 14% of the time

ExtremeCloud IQ vs Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Compared 9% of the time

Zscaler Cloud IPS vs Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Compared 7% of the time

Vectra AI vs Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

Compared 7% of the time

More Cisco Sourcefire SNORT Competitors

Darktrace vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

Compared 11% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

Compared 9% of the time

Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

Compared 9% of the time

Check Point IPS vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

Compared 7% of the time

Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

Compared 6% of the time

More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT

January 2026

Download Cisco Sourcefire SNORT product report

Buyer's Guide

Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

December 2025

Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report

Download Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention product report

Also Known As

Sourcefire SNORT

No data available

Overview

Snort is an open-source, rule-based, intrusion detection and prevention system. It combines the benefits of signature-, protocol-, and anomaly-based inspection methods to deliver flexible protection from malware attacks. Snort gained notoriety for being able to accurately detect threats at high speeds.

Cisco

Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is a cloud-based security service that combines cutting-edge technologies, including machine learning, artificial intelligence, and expert human monitoring, to effectively thwart advanced threats like malware, zero-day attacks, and command-and-control threats. It offers inline protection, scrutinizing all network traffic irrespective of port, protocol, or encryption. An integral component of Palo Alto Networks' security platform, it enjoys widespread adoption across diverse organizations. With its robust security capabilities, it's an ideal choice for entities of all sizes, particularly those in high-risk sectors such as finance, healthcare, and government agencies, seeking to safeguard their networks from a broad spectrum of advanced threats.

Palo Alto Networks

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

University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, SkiStar AB, TRI-AD, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

December 2025

Free Report: Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report.

See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.

We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.