"The content filtering is good."
"If you compare the ASA and the FirePOWER, the best feature with FirePOWER is easy to use GUI. It has most of the same functionality in the Next-Generation FirePOWER, such as IPS, IPS policies, security intelligence, and integration and identification of all the devices or hardware you have in your network. Additionally, this solution is user-friendly."
"I have experience with URL filtering, and it is very good for URL filtering. You can filter URLs based on the categories, and it does a good job. It can also do deep packet inspection."
"Web filtering is a big improvement for us. The previous version we used, the AC520, did not have that feature included. It was not very easy for us, especially because the environment had to be isolated and we needed to get updates from outside, such as Windows patches. That feature has really helped us when we are going outside to pull those patches."
"Provides good integrations and reporting."
"The most important feature is the intensive way you can troubleshoot Cisco Firepower Firewalls. You can go to the bit level to see why traffic is not handled in the correct way, and the majority of the time it's a networking issue and not a firewall issue. You can solve any problem without Cisco TAC help, because you can go very deeply under the hood to find out how traffic is flowing and whether it is not flowing as expected. That is something I have never seen with other brands."
"I like that Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is reliable. Support is also good."
"The main thing that I love the most is its policy and objects. Whenever I try to give access to a user, I can create an object via group creation in the object fields. This way, I am not able to enter a user in the policy repeatedly."
"This solution has two main features that we find very valuable; a threat-intelligence option, and a web/application filtering option. The technical support team are very good and very quick."
"The installation is easy, we have not had any complaints from our customers."
"Very reliable solution with good scalability and straightforward implementation."
"Five out of five ROI."
"Technical support is perfect."
"It is very fast and very easy to maintain. Another nice part of it is that you can easily extract the logs and move them over to a security operations center."
"The solution has been good for fulfilling our basic needs."
"I like that Juniper SRX is easy to use, scalable, and stable with good performance."
"The technical support is quite good."
"What I like the most about Juniper is that they have the same CLI on all routers, switches, and firewalls. If you have worked with any Juniper device, such as a Juniper router, you will be able to work with an SRX, which is really cool. It is a nice experience to work with every device of Juniper, not only firewalls."
"When compared to Palo Alto, Juniper is a better choice when it comes to the enterprise network and connectivity."
"We did not have problems with scaling, as we have less than 500 users in our organization."
"Deploying configurations takes longer than it should."
"We only have an issue with time sync with Cisco ASA and NTP. If the time is out of sync, it will be a disaster for the failover."
"I'm not a big fan of the FDM (Firepower Device Manager) that comes with Firepower. I found out that you need to use the Firepower Management Center, the FMC, to manage the firewalls a lot better. You can get a lot more granular with the configuration in the FMC, versus the FDM that comes out-of-the-box with it. FDM is like Firepower for dummies."
"We cannot have virtual domains, which we can create with FortiGate. This is something they should add in the future. Additionally, there is a connection limit and the FMC could improve."
"I would like to see improvement when you create policies on Snort 3 IPS on Cisco Firepower. On Snort 2, it was more like a UI page where you had some multiple choices where you could tweak your config. On Snort 3, the idea is more to build some rules on the text file or JSON file, then push it. So, I would like to see a lot of improvements here."
"Cisco makes horrible UIs, so the interface is something that should be improved."
"This product is managed using the Firepower Management Center (FMC), but it would be better if it also supported the command-line interface (CLI)."
"FlexConfig is there as a bridge for features that are not yet natively integrated into Firepower. It is a way of allowing you to be able to configure things that wouldn't otherwise be possible until the development team can add them into Firepower's native capability. There is still some work that needs to be done around FlexConfig. There are still quite a few complex things, like policy-based routing, that have to be done in FlexConfig, and it doesn't always work perfectly. Sometimes, there are some glitches. It is recommended that you configure FlexConfig policies with Cisco TAC. It would be good to see Cisco accelerate some of those configurations that you can only do in FlexConfig into the platform, so that they are there natively."
"SSL VPN license cost is not cheap."
"The current usage reporting is very basic."
"While the GUI is pretty good on the Juniper side, there can still be tweaks made to it that will make it even better."
"The user interface is something that Juniper needs to improve."
"Juniper SRX is stable, but it could improve. FortiGate has better stability than Juniper SRX."
"Their models for service providers could improve."
"Junos Space should be improved to be on par with FortiGate's solution for managing firewalls and routing."
"The capacity can be limiting. We have outgrown its capacity. You can only scale up to a certain extent, depending on the device purchased."
"The range of devices should be expanded to include those suitable for a small implementation. Juniper does not have any lower-priced SRX models, useful perhaps for a single ATM or a single bank branch."
"In the next release, I would like to have a better web interface. It needs to be more user-friendly. Right now, you can only access many features through the console."
More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Hillstone E-Series is ranked 27th in Firewalls with 3 reviews while Juniper SRX is ranked 16th in Firewalls with 37 reviews. Hillstone E-Series is rated 9.6, while Juniper SRX is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Hillstone E-Series writes "Efficient call processor and overall amazing ROI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX writes "Scalable with good technical support and works well for larger organizations". Hillstone E-Series is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, Hillstone T-Series, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Palo Alto Networks WildFire, whereas Juniper SRX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, pfSense and Check Point NGFW. See our Hillstone E-Series vs. Juniper SRX report.
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.
