"The most valuable feature is stability."
"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."
"It's got the capabilities of amassing a lot of throughput with remote access and VPNs."
"The customer service/technical support is very good with this solution."
"The solution offers very easy configurations."
"When it comes to the integration among Cisco tools, we find it easy. It's a very practical integration with other components as well."
"Feature-wise, we mostly use IPS because it is a security requirement to protect against attacks from outside and inside. This is where IPS helps us out a bunch."
"It is one of the fastest solutions, if not the fastest, in the security technology space. This gives us peace of mind knowing that as soon as a new attack comes online that we will be protected in short order. From that perspective, no one really comes close now to Firepower, which is hugely valuable to us from an upcoming new attack prevention perspective."
"The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control."
"I like that Juniper SRX is easy to use, scalable, and stable with good performance."
"Performance is a strong point."
"One of Juniper SRX's most valuable features is the site-to-site VPN."
"The CLI works perfectly."
"The GUI is simple to use."
"The technical support is quite good."
"Technical support is good. They quickly respond, and they even have local help here. They can actually give you an answer very quickly."
"The solution has good customization abilities and plenty of features."
"The flexibility of adding new kinds of services without spending any money can't be beaten."
"Sophos Intercept X is scalable. Currently, we have almost 30 people using it in our company."
"I have found the most valuable features to be antivirus and malware protection."
"The solution is very robust."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"It is a stable solution. It is also easy to install and can be deployed and maintained by one team member."
"It's a good solution for end-users. It's pretty easy to work with."
"On the VPN side, Firepower could be better. It needs more monitoring on VPNs. Right now, it's not that good. You can set up a VPN in Firepower, but you can't monitor it."
"An area of improvement for this solution is the console visualization."
"The performance should be improved."
"Web filtering needs improvement because sometimes the URL is miscategorized."
"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."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex for those unfamiliar with the solution."
"The price and SD-WAN capabilities are the areas that need improvement."
"FirePOWER does a good job when it comes to providing us with visibility into threats, but I would like to see a more proactive stance to it."
"I would like to have a better web UI for administration. Juniper could simplify the web UI and make it more compatible with mobile devices."
"Sometimes committing configurations takes a lot of time in Juniper because of the connections, and it could be a little bit faster."
"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."
"Juniper SRX's UI is very bad."
"The reporting is lacking."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
"Juniper SRX is stable, but it could improve. FortiGate has better stability than Juniper SRX."
"As a networking person, I don't really have any major issues with this device. Based on my experience of using it in a cluster, it could be more stable. I had an incident when one of the SRXs in a cluster couldn't learn ARP. It is a good solution, but firewalls don't seem to be an area of development for Juniper. They are focusing on data centers, routers, and switches, not firewalls."
"The stability could be improved."
"Also, simplifying the rules for the GeoIP. Making it simpler to understand would be an improvement."
"As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me."
"I'd like to find something in pfSense that is more specific to URL filtering. We have customers who would like to filter their web traffic. They would like to be able to say to their employees, "You can surf the web, but you cannot get access to Facebook or other social media," or "You can surf the web, but you're not allowed to gamble or watch porn on the web." My technicians say that doing this kind of stuff with pfSense nowadays is not easy. They can implement some filters using IP addresses but not by using the names of the domains and categories. So, we are not able to exclude some categories from the allowed traffic, such as porn, gambling, etc. To do that, we have to use another product and another web filter that uses DNS. I know that there are some third-party products that could work with pfSense, but I'd like the native pfSense solution to do that."
"I have been using WireGuard VPN because it is a lot faster and more secure than an open VPN. However, in the latest version of pfSense, they have removed this feature, which is one of the main features that I need. They should include this feature."
"Ease of use is a problem for a user who is unfamiliar with this product because, in the interface, everything has to be set manually."
"If you want to take advantage of all of the solution's options, you need to have a bit of a technical background. It's not for a layperson."
"It could use a little bit of improvement in the reporting."
Cisco NGFW firewalls deliver advanced threat defense capabilities to meet diverse needs, from
small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide
range of models, Cisco NGFW can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Advanced threat
defense capabilities include Next-generation IPS (NGIPS), Security Intelligence (SI), Advanced
Malware Protection (AMP), URL filtering, Application Visibility and Control (AVC), and flexible VPN
features. Inspect encrypted traffic and enjoy automated risk ranking and impact flags to reduce event
volume so you can quickly prioritize threats. Cisco NGFW firewalls are also available with clustering
for increased performance, high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco Firepower NGFWv is the virtualized version of Cisco's Firepower NGFW firewall. Widely
deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco NGFWv automatically scales up/down to meet
the needs of dynamic cloud environments and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco NGFWv
can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your
environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is
delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco
SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables
greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.
Juniper SRX is ranked 14th in Firewalls with 35 reviews while pfSense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 60 reviews. Juniper SRX is rated 7.8, while pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX writes "This best in class Next-Gen firewall is elegant in its ease-of-use and architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of pfSense writes "Feature-rich, well documented, and there is good support available online". Juniper SRX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Meraki MX and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos UTM, Sophos XG and Stormshield Network Security. See our Juniper SRX vs. pfSense 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.