Cisco IOS Security Reviews

We use the solution to secure data centres for clients.

The solution has the best features for routers embedded with firewall capabilities. It helps us protect the network.

The solution’s setup process could be better. It is complex regarding troubleshooting, and only highly skilled engineers can resolve it.

We have been using the solution for 15 years.

The solution is stable.

It is a scalable solution. We have more than 100 clients using the solution.

The solution's technical support is excellent. The team includes certified engineers.

The solution's initial setup process is easy if you are highly skilled in handling the troubleshooting part. The deployment takes around two to three weeks, depending on the requirements.

We can purchase the solution's licenses as per specific business requirements.

The solution provides a robust system. I advise others to understand the technology to use the system with ease.

I rate it a ten out of ten.

We use the product for firewalls. 

We cannot directly upgrade the system. The tool's deployment is also very difficult in legacy environments. The tool needs to have bigger ports as well. 

I have been working with the product for four years. 

The product is stable. 

The tool is scalable. 

The tool's deployment takes around thirty minutes to complete. 

The tool could be priced lower. If you want advanced services, then you need to purchase them. 

Most of our customers are from the banking and financial domain. I have chosen the product after a thorough comparison and reading through whitepapers. 

The primary use case of the solution is firewall protection.

The most valuable feature is endpoint protection.

The security of the solution has room for improvement.

The solution is complex and can be more user-friendly.

The stability and scalability can be improved.

I have been using the solution for over one year.

The solution is not stable.

The solution doesn't have the proper bandwidth source to be scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment takes about two hours.

I give the solution a six out of ten.

We have over 1,000 people using the solution in our organization.

We require around ten people for the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

I do not recommend the solution because it is not secure and is complex.

Our company uses the solution as intrusion protection for customers. It fully integrates with the BMA and ISE. We manage all traffic in data centers to protect them from internal users and outside traffic.

The solution effectively integrates with Umbrella which has an intelligent background and is very helpful in tech analysis or discovery. 

The solution is not user friendly and it is hard to manage the GUI interface. This is an ongoing CISCO problem. 

The solution needs Active/Active firewalls to have good load balance with high availability. The firewalls should work simultaneously, not just as failovers. 

I have been using the solution for ten years. 

The solution is very stable if configured properly. I rate stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is very highly scalable and other products really don't compete with its scalability. The solution can easily be used for small companies or big enterprises with thousands of users. I rate scalability an eight out of ten. 

Technical support does not have a broad knowledge base, so I rate them a six out of ten. 

Neutral

The setup is better than before but still not easy or clear like Palo Alto. If you want to configure the solution, then you need to study how to do it. 

The setup is difficult so I rate it a six out of ten. 

We implement the solution for customers on our own unless we have an issue or bug. It takes one expert staff person for deployment. Depending on the customer's policies and the network's complexity, deployment might take from three to seven days. 

Our process includes verifying the license and setting up the firewall, hardware, FMC, and the failover when there is more than one firewall. We then define or set up the configurable interfaces and the IP addresses. Finally, we define the VLAN of the customer and policies for each VLAN. 

The solution does not require ongoing maintenance if it is configured properly. 

Our ROI is that the solution saves time because it reduces attacks and helps with ongoing protection. The subscription model is also very helpful for ROI. 

I rate ROI at 1800%. 

The pricing is average and includes all features with support. I rate pricing a six out of ten. 

Palo Alto has a better GUI interface for handling all features and is easier to configure. 

I recommend the solution and rate it an eight out of ten. 

Cisco IOS Security helps us with splitting the DNS between a specific perimeter.

The product has valuable features for business intelligence. It enables intrusion detection for the network.

The product's technical support services need improvement.

We have been using Cisco IOS Security for more than ten years.

Cisco releases new patches and updates, whenever required. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability a ten out of ten. We have three users for it in our organization. We might increase the usage depending on the business requirements.

Cisco has a lot of support partners. However, it takes a long time to replace some equipment.

Positive

I have used Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) before.

The initial setup requires specific training. I rate the process an eight out of ten. The deployment involves setting up a bot for Buffalo with the management IP address. After that, I deploy the data center and access it remotely to complete the process.

I rate Cisco IOS Security's pricing a ten out of ten.

We evaluated a few products. Later, we opted for Cisco as we already have experience working with it.

It is a good product. It is valuable in terms of availability. Once configured and installed, the equipment runs for years. I rate it a seven out of ten as its support cost is high.

The main purpose of Cisco IOS Security is for our data center. It connects each node and user to the network.

The most valuable feature of Cisco IOS Security is posturing.

Cisco IOS Security could improve by having more compatibility with other Cisco solutions.

I have been using Cisco IOS Security for approximately three years.

Cisco IOS Security is a stable solution.

The scalability of Cisco IOS Security is good. I can increase and decrease elements when needed.

We have approximately 45,000 people that can use the solution. Additionally, We have approximately 1,000 IT managers, technicians, and other users who directly use this solution.

The support from Cisco IOS Security was very helpful.

I rate the support from Cisco IOS Security a four out of ten.

I previously used another similar solution.

I can do all the implementation of the solutions through the Cisco DNA Center. I can manage the Cisco IOS Security configuration. The whole process can be complex. Additionally, when we cannot connect to the internet we need to do manual configuration.

The full setup can take a couple of hours. However, initially, it took to use a couple of weeks.

We did the implementation of Cisco IOS Security in-house.

We have two service engineers that are involved in the deployment and maintenance of the solution. They have the appropriate training needed to support the solution.

I rate Cisco IOS Security an eight out of ten.

We are a reseller and Cisco IOS Security is one of the network security products that we offer to our clients. The primary use case is securing connectivity between sites. Examples of this are between a site and a data center, or a site and a cloud provider.

DMVPN as a technology, not necessarily for security, has allowed my customers to be more agile in their connectivity, without having to rely on a hub-and-spoke topology. Rather, they can leverage a full mesh topology, which is essentially SD-WAN.

IPsec allows us to overlay that, which means we can obfuscate the underlying infrastructure, whatever the transports are. Whether it is a secure private transport like MPLS or just public internet, we can commoditize the underlying transports and trust that everything is secured from prying eyes. 

What I have used the most and received the most benefit from is the IPsec technology. It overlays on DMVPN tunnels and being able to secure these object-based tunnels is good because they perform significantly better than traditional IPsec tunnels.

With respect to user-friendliness, it is a command-line interface and those with such experience will get along just fine, whereas others may struggle. My expectation is that it will remain a primarily command-line-based technology.

The biggest annoyance is probably the quality control of the code. They have to make sure that they are better at vetting bugs and software issues before they release code to the general public.

I have been working with this product for the past ten years.

It is not the most stable system that I have worked with.

I don't think that scalability is much of an issue.

Our clients are small enterprise-level organizations, typically between 1,000 and 5,000 knowledge workers.

The technical support is pretty good and I would rate them an eight out of ten. If anything, they should work on their response times for critical cases.

I would say that 80% of my experience is with Cisco products.

The initial setup is fairly complex, although it depends on the feature sets that you're looking for. Cisco IOM is probably the most complex part of it because it involves setting up all of the QoS policies, performance-routing policies, and performance-routing domains.

From a DMVPN over IPsec perspective, it is pretty straightforward.

Price is certainly something that the IOS technology has fallen behind the competition on.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to ensure that they don't overlook the technical overhead that is required to get it set up and keep it running. From an SD-WAN perspective, there are more user-friendly options out there, so they are going to have their own shortcomings. However, if you're going down the route of a Cisco command-line-based solution then make sure that you're prepared to have the staff on hand to manage it or instead, have a trusted partner that you work with and has the expertise to manage it.

From a feature-set perspective, as long as Cisco continues down the path of combining features from its products onto the unified platform, it will have all the features you need.

It's a good product and it does exactly what it's intended to do, but there and stability issues and the price is expensive.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We're using it for internet traffic security. It's for protection. 

We don't have a problem with the user interface and it is pretty user-friendly.

We don't mind the cost.

The security is very good. 

Cisco is very good, very powerful. 

It's a reliable, stable product in general. It's better than the competition. 

The product is easy to set up. 

It is a stable product.

We find the product to be scalable. 

How to improve the solution depends on the usage. 

Sometimes I find it difficult to manage. Some configurations are difficult for new engineers, for example. 

It could be more flexible. 

I've been using the solution for the last ten years. 

This is a very stable, reliable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's a scalable product. 

We have 500 to 600 people using the solution.

Before, it was very easy to get in touch with support. However, it's become more difficult. It can take a long time to get an answer. We also have to deal with time differences, which can make it harder to get an answer. 

It is very easy for me to implement the solution. It's very good, it's very easy. There are command planning and equations. Cisco is very simple. We don't have issue with Cisco.

The deployment depends on the product you use and the network design. 

You can do it in small batches. It can take some time to refresh. It might take one or two days. 

The cost may be around $5,000 to $10,000 a year. If you want support you have to pay at least this price. 

We are a Cisco customer and end-user. 

We've been using the mid-range version since 2012.

I'd rate the solution around eight out of ten. 

Cisco is great. It's likely number one in the world. I'd recommend the solution as it is a very powerful product. However, it's best to have Cisco experts on staff or available to you to make things easier.