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
59
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (23rd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (3rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (4th), Cisco Security Portfolio (4th)
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 1.5%, 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 7.2% mindshare, down 8.1% since last year.
Network Monitoring Software
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Rainier S. - PeerSpot reviewer
You are able to drill down into a center's utilization, then create reports based on it
In the last year or two, we have been working with our Cisco NAS engineers to improve our security posturing. It is more our being proactive rather than reactive. While Stealthwatch and Lancope have this ability to look inside and give you visibility (a great feature), follow-up is the rule. We would like filters that you can put into place to tap onto certain types of behaviors, alerts out, and/or hopefully a block. This is sort of what we are looking for. I might be speaking too early, because we are not down this path yet. We know the feature set is there, we just do not know yet how to achieve it. That is proactive rather than more reactive. For Lancope Stealthwatch, we would like to see it more on the ASA Firewall platform. While this might already be available, this is more a failing of Cisco to inform us if it is there. For example: * Are we on the right or wrong version of the code? * What does the code look like? * Are we are really looking at firewalls? Or is it more about the foundation and route switches that we are seeing? It is about visibility.
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

"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."
"I value the feature which enables me to detect devices talking to suspect IPs."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its reporting and mitigation capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it helps you gain visibility for your application."
"Cisco Stealthwatch provides the solutions analytics and threat detection capabilities that I am looking for. It has also improved the network visibility of our organization."
"Cisco Stealthwatch has reduced the amount of time to detect an immediate threat."
"The beginning of any security investigation starts with net flow data."
"The deployment was a breeze. It is a very innovative and robust platform that allows us to bi-directionally stitch together data elements from Netflow-enabled devices to provide a context for network utilization."
"It effectively prevents malware, ransomware, and other attacks."
"It is a stable product."
"The stability of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is good."
"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly, has interesting features, URL filtering, and threat prevention."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"I find the malware protection very handy."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is the market leader as far as security gateways and endpoint protection. Additionally, the threat database that is used is one of the best."
"One of the most valuable features is the anti-malware protection."
 

Cons

"I would like to see interoperability with other Cisco products because we have ThousandEyes, Cisco Prime, and others. The interaction among these is important to us."
"One update that I would like to see is an agent-based client. Currently, Stealthwatch is network-based. A local agent could help manage endpoints."
"I would like to see a hybrid solution that can work without being connected directly to the internet for those destinations."
"One thing I would like to see improved is if it could automatically be tied through ISE, instead of you having to manually get notifications and disable it yourself."
"Cisco Stealthwatch needs more integration with device discovery. We have to do a lot of hard work to figure out what things are. Better service integration is required."
"We are continuing down the road of ACI and ISE with Cisco, so we would like to see the continuation of Stealthwatch integrating into ISE for exchange of information, and also, more into the ACI environment too."
"The configuration of the solution was quite complex."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The organization mail security solutions could be improved. There is no mail security solution available."
"Palo Alto's maintenance needs to be improved."
"The initial setup is complex."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve the commercial offing. Other solutions, such as Fortinet provide better commercial features."
"There is a potential drawback with the lack of support for the ICAP protocol."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower. In comparison with other solutions, I believe they're quite competitive."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"The application’s pricing and dashboard need improvement. It could be user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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"
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"We pay for support costs on a yearly basis."
"NetFlow is very expensive."
"​Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside (in traffic)."
"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."
"Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside>in traffic."
"Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is quite competitive, offering extensive threat detection and prevention capabilities, though it is priced higher than some alternatives."
"The pricing could be lower."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower."
"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."
"From one to ten, with one being the most expensive, I would rate the pricing of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention a one out of ten. It is my understanding that Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is the most expensive one."
"The price of the solution is higher than others on the market. A price reduction would be beneficial if it does not impact their database quality."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
30%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

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 tool is not cheaply priced. In cybersecurity, you want an extra layer of security in your organization. Some sectors want NDR solutions, so you cannot deploy such tools everywhere, as they are ...
What needs improvement with Cisco Stealthwatch?
The expensive nature of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required.
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
 

Learn More

Video not 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.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.