Cisco Secure Firewall Reviews

We use it as a firewall and it has performed adequately.

It allows the securing of various network segments, based on use.

DMZ segmentation, and IDS and IPS.

It is fairly stable. However, Cisco suffers from some integration issues with other products, but this product, as a standalone, is fine. There is a problem with the Cisco Catalyst Switches in terms of assembling bursts and having them interact properly with the Cisco Firepower.

The scalability is good.

Tech support has been good.

We've been using Cisco. Prior to this it was Cisco ASA. This was the next evolution.

When selecting a vendor it is important that they have positive industry feedback, that they are a visionary leader.

I was involved in the initial set up and it was complex.

I give this solution a seven out of 10. Some of the tools are still a little bit difficult to use.

• VPN services
• IDS/IPS services using Firepower
• Provides perimeter and internal firewall services.

We provide managed services based on the Cisco ASA product. The brand is reassuring to customers when procuring our services.

• VPN
• Firewall
• IDS/IPS

These features allow us to deliver services to meet client needs across various industry verticals.

MSSP oriented interface: I would like a single console which would allow me to manage settings creating consistency across all customers.

The user interface of the Prime Security Manager is, well, prime and one of the best pieces of software I have seen from them, and the features are on par if not better than what their competitors offer.

Cisco has done a nice job of integrating global IP reputation management into the firewall with its Security Intelligence and Operations module for insights and malware collection.

Prime manager is just for the CX line for now. CX features also add about a 30% overhead on throughput.

I love its CLI mode of working, it gives plenty of information with a single line of command.

This feature allows its administrator to perform advanced level tasks with much ease.

These products provide much stability which, in return, any organization demands to run its functions properly and smoothly.

This product lacks in GUI format; that needs to be more mature and composed.

10 years +

No issues.

Rarely, due to software issues.

As of now, no.

Excellent but if non-Indian engineer is assigned.

We have almost 99% Cisco based infrastructure.

Pretty straightforward.

Usually yes. We did like Huawei and Juniper.

Cisco has done great job in introducing new features in their security product by acquiring specialized companies in the past. However, they still need to improve their unique feature products as they are in a challenger position, but not on top, at various product review portals.

We are using the solution for airports.

The Cisco NGFW is an excellent fit for purpose for our network security.

I have been using the solution for five years.

We have not had to deal with stability issues.

The support of the solution is great, their staff is perfect.

My team tells me that other solutions such as Fortinet and Palo Alto are easier to implement.

People have said that Palo Alto is a less expensive solution than Cisco, but in my experience, at least from today, Cisco is cheaper than Palo Alto. 

I do not hear anything bad about the competition. I am difficult to change my ways and learn a new product. Unless somebody comes and makes a SWOT analysis and shows me the evidence of how the alternative is better, I am fine with Cisco.

I would recommend this solution to others. 

I rate Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to join our private network to the customer's network.

In our business, we don't have to be on the customer's network, so a lot of people will install cheap equipment. We're trying to push it to where we can standardize the equipment, although the cost of Cisco products would have to come down a little bit in order for us to be more competitive.

Firewalls are difficult, and this solution gives us outside access to connect with the customer's network and service them better. It makes us more efficient.

This solution is easy to use if you know how to set it up.

The most valuable features are on the routing side, with the control between the two networks and the rules that are in there.

The inclusion of an autofill feature would improve the ease of commands.

This solution would benefit from being more cost-effective.

This solution is very stable, and I haven't seen any issues with it.

Scalability doesn't really apply to us, as it is just a firewall client.

Technical support for this solution is really good. We had an issue with a firewall and it was a good turnaround that was quick.

Our implementation of this solution was driven by the customer.

The initial setup of this solution is pretty straightforward. We did have some rules that somebody had put on it that didn't match up, but we got it all worked out.

We implemented this solution in-house.

With respect to the routers and switches, or the core stacks that we get, they seem to be pretty comparable so I don't have any issues with the licensing.

Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment.

While we have a partnership with Cisco, there are other products that have been used within the company. After evaluating other products such as those by Barracuda, it just happened that this solution worked out better for us. I like the Cisco reputation.

With this solution, we have everything that we need. I don't know about other people's use cases, but ours is pretty straightforward.

My advice to anybody researching this type of solution is to stick with Cisco products, no matter which one it is. We've had pretty good luck with everything from Cisco.

I don't have any issues with this solution, so I would rate it a ten out of ten.

Generally, it has highly productive platforms and it has good capabilities.

It just works like an internal firewall. It's an ordinary role of this platform, nothing special.

At this point, we find that this product has high productivity and high availability and there is no need for improvement. 

If there is old hardware, or old appliances, it does not necessarily work with the new Cisco generation firewalls.

It is a highly stable product. We rarely receive any serious outdates, so it works quite well. 

Yes, we use the technical support maybe twice a year. We received a very fast response time.

It was very straightforward. It was not complex at all.

When evaluating a possible solution, I always consider:

• Availability
• Productivity

It was used for a remote office deployment connect back via VPN to the corporate office and services.

Cisco ASA works out-of-the-box. With the setup wizard, it was easy to get it deployed quickly, even by novice IT users.

The ability to have a protected home network on the unit and a separate secured office network linked back to corporate.

More intuitive support for SIP services are needed. This took a long time to configure properly for the user.