We performed a comparison between Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Cisco technical support is unbeatable. It offers a premium service every time."
"I like most of Cisco's features, like malware detection and URL filtering."
"The solution can be integrated with some network electors like Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco ISE, and Active Directory to provide the client with authentication certificates."
"It simplifies the configuration process by offering pre-defined base configurations, including security and connectivity settings."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"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 has a huge rate of protection. It's has a low level of positives and a huge rate of threat protection. It's easy to deploy and easy to implement. It has an incredible price rate compared to similar solutions."
"The solution is rather easy to use."
"The VPN and the filtering features are the most valuable. Its VPN is very strong, and its services are very nice. The main problem in India is the service. There are not enough Check Point and Fortinet Firewall services, but for this product, the service is very good."
"It works right out of the box. You just have to enable it and you can start working."
"The most important feature of this solution is the SLAs."
"The initial setup was straightforward and, because we only need intrusion detection and prevention, we needed only about four hours to deploy it."
"The alarm system is valuable."
"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."
"I don't think this solution is a time-based control system, because one cannot filter traffic based on time."
"The implementation could be a bit easier."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"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."
"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 cloud can be improved."
"Performance needs improvement."
"The user interface and configuration can be improved."
"Multi properties could be added to the solution in the future to make it better."
"Regarding technical support, they could use more engineers."
"I would like to see faster automatation."
"Its graphical user interface could be improved because not everybody is technical. There is a lack of knowledge, and they can give some training for this solution."
More WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 12th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 18 reviews while WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is ranked 31st in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 5 reviews. Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6, while WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "An IPS solution for security and protection but lacks stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service writes "Good VPN and filtering features, 100% stable, but needs a better graphical user interface and more training". Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Splunk User Behavior Analytics, whereas WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS. See our Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs. WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service 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.