No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Sourcefire SNORT vs Claroty Platform 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 Sourcefire SNORT
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (14th)
Claroty Platform
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Remote Access (9th), Vulnerability Management (23rd), Operational Technology (OT) Security (2nd), Cyber-Physical Systems Protection (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Network Security Systems solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is designed for Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) and holds a mindshare of 3.1%, up 2.3% compared to last year.
Claroty Platform, on the other hand, focuses on Cyber-Physical Systems Protection, holds 40.0% mindshare, down 42.9% since last year.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT3.1%
Fortinet FortiGate11.4%
Darktrace10.8%
Other74.7%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
Cyber-Physical Systems Protection Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Claroty Platform40.0%
Armis36.5%
Verve Security Center9.1%
Other14.400000000000006%
Cyber-Physical Systems Protection
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2772102 - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Architect at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Logging and customizable rules have helped improve threat monitoring and detection
The logging is mainly what I consider one of the best features with Cisco Sourcefire SNORT. Being able to log and store it in a file allows you to push it to a centralized repository. The logging and reporting help improve incident response. You should always be logging threats, any sort of misconfiguration, and anything that could be an issue. It's important to at least log and monitor it. The basic rules provide a good baseline in assessing Cisco Sourcefire SNORT's ability in providing real-time analytics for threat detection, but as a professional, you should look to constantly modify that baseline. They provide extensive customizability so you can define your own rules. The customizability allows it to be adaptable in protecting against diverse network threats to the constant change.
AP
Senior Consultant at Payatu
Passive scanning excels and support proves invaluable
Regarding the cons of the Claroty Platform, it is not about the deployment, but rather the identification. The Claroty Platform becomes too noisy when it gives numerous CVEs related to vendor match. Sometimes, these CVEs are not actually related to the device in the firmware at the site. The Claroty Platform identifies effectively but sometimes identifies many CVEs which might not be the actual issue in certain scenarios.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is rather easy to use."
"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 logging is mainly what I consider one of the best features with Cisco Sourcefire SNORT; being able to log and store it in a file allows you to push it to a centralized repository."
"The tool's most valuable feature is threat detection, which is important because we have multiple layers not only in Cisco."
"It has a huge rate of protection, a low level of positives, is easy to deploy and implement, has an incredible price rate compared to similar solutions, and has a good support channel and technical assistance."
"If you compare it to other vendors, the technical support from Cisco is excellent."
"This solution makes life a lot easier as there are fewer man-hours required and we no longer need too many resources to manage it."
"With Cisco Sourcefire SNORT, we've been able to prevent and detect intrusion in our network and actually decrease our SLA (Service Level Agreement)."
"Claroty provides continuous threat protection and identifies pre-empty stuff and false positives."
"The platform ensures security without imposing significant delays."
"I appreciate the active coding, deep inspection of packages, and data retrieval. The tool covers information about assets and attack vectors, which I find superior to other tools. Based on alerts, I create reports detailing how an attacker can penetrate the plant, both externally and internally."
"I like how the tool does passive and active discovery and threat detection and shows risks, recommendations, and vulnerabilities. It gives risk scores and gathers everything in one place - IP, device name, etc. We can integrate it with other tools for overall network mapping. It's useful for audits, compliance, and monitoring of all devices in the industry. It provides both monitoring and control. We also have SRA for incident response, which lets us search all alerts if we deploy the Claroty Platform."
"Customer service is number one and the best."
"Their SRA solution, the Secure Remote Access solution, is very useful for industrial environments."
"I have had a very good experience with the Claroty Platform."
"The solution's asset management is really great compared to Dragos or Nozomi."
 

Cons

"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT can scale, but if you have too much, you could fill up your log files, which I consider when discussing scalability."
"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."
"I don't think this solution is a time-based control system, because one cannot filter traffic based on time."
"A lot of Cisco equipment is very good, but in judging the model of this solution that we have, I feel that it is the worst."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"Integration with other components — even Cisco's own products — can be enhanced to improve administrative experience."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
"We face issues in the alert investigation area because it does not properly give the alert communication patterns."
"The graphical user interface is quite poor."
"Occasionally, I face a login problem despite entering the correct password."
"I think the only issue is that the hardware Claroty uses is expensive."
"Introducing an AI chatbot to assist you when you have doubts could be beneficial."
"For improvement, I think the training could be more practical. We have external training, but they're mostly theoretical. I want the solution to provide hands-on lab experience to help users learn better."
"I've reported four bugs and three feature requests so far. The main area of focus should be on how attacks are detected. The attack vector information needs to be more detailed. For example, it's not enough to state that an SMB v1 version open can lead to a WannaCry attack. A more detailed explanation should help clients understand the various ways an attack could occur."
"There is room for improvement in the user interface to make it more vibrant and interactive, similar to IT tools. Improvements could also be made in the Secure Remote Access (SRA) user interaction and graphical representations of recordings."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing for this solution is paid on a yearly basis."
"If one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is cheap, I rate the tool's price as a five."
"The cost is per port and can be expensive but it does include training and support for three years."
"I don't know the exact amount, but most of the time when I go to a company with a proposition, they will say, "This thing that you are selling is good, but it's expensive. Why don't you propose something like FortiGate, Check Point, or Palo Alto?" Cisco device are expensive compared to other devices."
"We have a three-year license for this solution."
"The licensing for physical devices is cheap, but the software version is expensive. The software version costs around 26-28 dollars. I was surprised and even double-checked. It was shocking."
"The tool is quite expensive."
"It's a bit expensive compared to other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
University
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Sourcefire SNORT?
If one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is cheap, I rate the tool's price as a five. There are some other tools in the market that are more expensive than Cisco. There are no additional c...
What needs improvement with Cisco Sourcefire SNORT?
I have not had much experience with the community-driven rule set while utilizing Cisco Sourcefire SNORT. I don't have experience with recognizing zero-day vulnerabilities, but based on my knowledg...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Sourcefire SNORT?
Endpoint protection is the main use case. The main aspect involves specifying different rules, and when network traffic hits these rules, it will try to block the traffic or at least log the traffi...
What needs improvement with Claroty Platform?
Regarding the cons of the Claroty Platform, it is not about the deployment, but rather the identification. The Claroty Platform becomes too noisy when it gives numerous CVEs related to vendor match...
What is your primary use case for Claroty Platform?
My clients are using the Claroty Platform for asset identification, finding CVEs and threat intel. I am aware of the continuous threat detection feature of the Claroty Platform, and even if it is g...
What advice do you have for others considering Claroty Platform?
I am using the Claroty Platform but not using Armis. They might be able to integrate AI into the Claroty Platform when they are creating attack vectors. I have had a very good experience with the C...
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire SNORT
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CareCore, City of Biel, Dimension Data, LightEdge, Lone Star College System, National Rugby League, Port Aventura, Smart City Networks, Telecom Italia, The Department of Education in Western Australia
Rockwell Automation
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Darktrace, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS). Updated: April 2026.
886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.