Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Network Analytics
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (22nd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (3rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (5th), Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
Palo Alto Networks Advanced...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Network Security Systems solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Secure Network Analytics is designed for Network Monitoring Software and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, down 1.7% compared to last year.
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, on the other hand, focuses on Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS), holds 7.5% mindshare, down 8.1% since last year.
Network Monitoring Software
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Sudhakar T - PeerSpot reviewer
Strong network security analytics with excellent encrypted traffic analysis features
Improvements are needed on the application layer for complete security analysis. The solution should have the ability to analyze security events not only at the network layer but also at the application and OS layers. There's a need for a more comprehensive licensing model where all necessary licenses are included by default.
Carlos Bracamonte - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, reliable, simple to install and good technical support
We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection. I'm not sure what the remaining threat protection features are off the top of my head. But beyond that, we use URL filtering. We have three approved cases for using external dynamic lists that are stored in a bucket repository. Then, for each URL site that needs to be whitelisted, we add it to the external dynamic list in order to gain access to this email. I would like Wildfire to be implemented. We use the equivalent in Cisco is the integration policies. We have the Wildfire but we are not currently implementing it. We don't have the license to use it, but we are not currently implementing it until we present the use cases that the company gives some value to and they approve the use of it.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Using this solution has helped us to detect and identify viruses or malicious activity in the network early on."
"It does change the way we troubleshoot and it is relatively easy to use once you learn it. I would recommend it to someone considering it."
"The solution reduces the amount of time it takes to detect and remediate threats."
"Cisco products are incredibly stable, boasting a 200% stability."
"Able to drill down into a center's utilization, then create reports based on it."
"Using the Cognitive Analytics feature, we have complete visibility that we didn’t have before."
"I believe this solution has reduced our incident response time."
"Cisco Stealthwatch has reduced the amount of time to detect an immediate threat."
"I like the solution's interface."
"The sandboxing tools offer great prevention for cloud feeds."
"With the IP address flag, I was able to see that I was being hacked. The moment there was an interaction between somebody on my network and that IP, the solution was able to flag it, and we were able to protect ourselves."
"It's very easy to use and configure. What is nice about Palo Alto is that even if you don't understand how to use it, you can just click on upload and upload everything that needs to be blocked."
"Edge protection is a valuable feature."
"The stability of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is good."
"I find the malware protection very handy."
"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."
 

Cons

"We determined that Stealthwatch wouldn't provide the machine learning model that we required."
"I would like to see it better organized when I'm looking at it."
"I think the interface is a little lacking. The interface seems like it just needs to be modernized. It's been the same interface now, ever since I've seen it probably four years ago."
"The ability to be natively integrated into Port Aggregator would be beneficial because it would reduce just one more component that's needed in order to have that type of view."
"The reporting of day-to-day metrics still has room for improvement."
"The version with the Dell server had iDRAC problems. Often, it reported iDRAC failure."
"I would like to see a hybrid solution that can work without being connected directly to the internet for those destinations."
"Complexity on integration is not so straightforward and you really need an expert to help build it out."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"Generally, to deploy it will take some downtime, about a day."
"We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection."
"Right now we are focusing on email. If Palo Alto can increase the features related to email filtering and the new malware, it would help us protect our systems."
"The solution could benefit from improved AI analytics to predict potential attacks before they occur, similar to NDR systems."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve the commercial offing. Other solutions, such as Fortinet provide better commercial features."
"It's not so easy to set up a test environment, because it's not so easy to get the test license. The vendor only gives you 90 days for a test license; it's a tough license to get."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Today, we are part of the big Cisco ELA, and it is a la carte. We can get orders for whatever we want. At the end of the day, we have to pay for it in one big expense, but that is fine. We are okay with that."
"It is worth the cost."
"On a yearly basis, licensing is somewhere around $30,000."
"Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside>in traffic."
"There are additional licenses needed for the number of so-called network flows. It's hard to plan the number of flows you need in the network, this is a problem. The price of the Cisco Stealthwatch is relatively inexpensive"
"This is an expensive product. We have quit paying for support because we don't want to have to upgrade it and keep paying for it."
"The yearly licensing cost is about $50,000."
"It has a subscription model. There is yearly support, and there is also three-year support. It depends on what the customers want."
"It is an expensive solution and I would like to see a drop in price."
"If you want to have all of the good features then you have to pay extra for licensing."
"It's not too expensive."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower."
"The pricing and the licensing are pretty competitive at this stage. As a reseller, I would like to see the price come down a little bit so I can compete better against other firewalls because we do that all the time."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve by having consistent pricing at system levels."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
842,672 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
29%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Stealthwatch?
The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is the Threat Intelligence integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Stealthwatch?
The organization experienced challenges with licensing as Cisco has multiple licensing factors, and there are concerns about the price. Cisco solutions are considered to be very expensive.
What needs improvement with Cisco Stealthwatch?
Improvements are needed on the application layer for complete security analysis. The solution should have the ability to analyze security events not only at the network layer but also at the applic...
Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
Arbor would be the best bid, apart from Arbor, Palo Alto and Fortinet have good solutions. As this is an ISP, I would prefer Arbor.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?
The pricing is competitive, and with current campaigns and discounts, it provides an excellent device for a reasonable price.
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, SkiStar AB, TRI-AD, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
842,672 professionals have used our research since 2012.