Juniper SRX Series Firewall Reviews

We are a financial institution and we use Juniper SRX routers to support our credit team, as well as our branch network. I am part of the IT department.

The Juniper router has a firewall built-in, which is a nice security enhancement for our organization. It adds a bit more value.

The support is very good.

The range of devices should be expanded to include those suitable for a small implementation. Juniper does not have any lower-priced SRX models, useful perhaps for a single ATM or a single bank branch. Having such a model at a reasonable price would be good.

In the time that we have used Juniper, we have not seen them improve their product line. If you look at Cisco, they have all kinds of network products. They have routers, switches, and firewalls. But with Juniper, they are not coming up with different kinds of products. They should be including more firewalls and other products. This is an area that Juniper should improve in general.

In Bangladesh, there is a very limited number of partners. The problem with this is that there is a monopoly, and I think that they should end this by increasing the number of local partners.

We have been working with Juniper SRX routers for more than five years.

Juniper SRX is a stable product.

This is a scalable router. In our organization, there are almost 3,000 people using the Juniper product. They have varied roles.

We plan to increase our use of Juniper products in the future, although it depends on input from management.

The technical support is quite good.

Currently, I am also using a Cisco product. The split between Cisco and Juniper devices is approximately 50/50.

Compared to Cisco, the price for Juniper SRX routers is very reasonable. The reason that we are switching to Juniper is because of the cost.

The initial setup is easy.

As we have been using this product for quite a long time, we are used to it and our resources have become very skilled with Juniper devices. The deployment does not take very long.

Our in-house network team is responsible for deployment.

There are six people in our network team. They are network administrators.

Juniper products provide a good return on investment.

This is a cost-effective solution because the price is very reasonable, and some of the features are available at no extra cost. That's the beauty of Juniper.

We have a perpetual license, which comes with the device. Once we purchase it, we can continue the service for three years. When the three-year warranty expires, we have to sign a new agreement with the OEM.

We are looking to gain some experience in using Mikrotik routers and switches.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Juniper is to enroll in the training that they have available. Train first, then deploy. That will make it much easier.

Overall, I think that this is quite a good product. However, they need to expand their range of device offerings.

I would rate Juniper SRX a seven out of ten.

• Manipulation of rules
• Flexibility in day-by-day use

Junos is the best OS for networks. It is very powerful and flexible.

The rollback option and Commit Confirmed are great features. They give us the security to change configurations without downtime.

It would be good if Junos had "unique commands" between all hierarchical levels, discarding the use of the "Run" command.

The robustness of Linux on top of Junos can be more effective after power down.

No stability issues.

No scalability issues.

High level of technical support.

We used Fortinet, and changed to Juniper to use Junos.

Easy.

Pricing is very good, not expensive.

We use the SRX1500 with Junos 15.1X49-D75.5. 

I rate the product 10 out of 10. It is very strong and Junos is very powerful. The total throughput is very large.

We're using it as a primary firewall and UTM for the main lines coming into our offices and also for connecting our sub-offices around the world.

Previously, we had different routers for each of the incoming lines to the office, and we had other firewalls on the backend to manage them. Now, we have changed all of these, and we have all the lines coming into one single solution, which is SRX. We manage everything very easily from one single interface. Previously, we used to have 10 different devices to do that. Now, we have only one.

We like the fact that we can easily combine multiple internet links to the office and use them like one link.

It is very fast and very easy to maintain. Another nice part of it is that you can easily extract the logs and move them over to a security operations center.

Its logging is very good, but we would like to have an easier way of creating more reports. We would like to be able to manipulate the reports or manage the way the reports are coming out.

In terms of new features, we are using almost all of the features that it has, and there is nothing specific that it is lacking.

I have been using this solution for four years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. We haven't used the scalability up till now, but we know that we can extend it.

We have 150 users here, and then we have around 30 to 40 users in different countries such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Norway. They're using some parts of it. They are using some smaller units to connect to the main office.

We don't have any plans to increase its usage as of now. Any expansion would be in terms of getting new offices around the world. We may install more of those smaller ones, but for the time being, as far as I know, we will not expand it in the office because it is already performing as it should. It actually did a very good job when we were working remotely because it allows us to connect to the office very easily and work remotely.

They have been pretty good. In some cases, they took a little bit of time to give a response for the cases we were facing. However, in most of the cases, they were very fast in responding and providing full resolution to the cases we faced.

We had different routers for each of the incoming lines to the office, and we had other firewalls on the backend to manage them. We switched because it was too difficult to manage multiple solutions for each of those lines. We wanted to have one single place where we could manage everything. We also didn't want to have some people going out from one internet line and some from another internet line. We wanted to combine all those lines together and make them work as one, and that's what we achieved with SRX.

We were not so much involved in the setup because we had a security company to do that for us. It took us about two months.

We had a security company for its implementation. Our experience with them was very good.

For its maintenance, we have our IT department. There are three people for managing the maintenance of it. 

We evaluated many other options. We checked out Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Check Point.

I would advise others to do good planning in the beginning because that helps a lot in having a very little downtime. It took us two months to implement it, which might seem very long, but we had zero downtime. Nobody noticed anything during the switch. It was the best way to implement it. This is the most important part. When you are trying to do such changes in the organization, it is very important that you do it by using the right resources and from the right perspective.

I would rate Juniper SRX a 10 out of 10.

We are using this solution mainly for the NPCs and the firewall of the mobile data customers. We are using it to protect the ISP of the mobile data customers: 2G, 3G, and 4G customers. 

In terms of features, we are using Source NAT. 

The virtualization feature: Sometimes customers are requesting a private connection using mobile data when they are connecting to remote sites. 

The Juniper SRX product needs to improve in terms of innovation. E.g., Checkpoint comes with a monitoring solution embedded in its product, as well as providing good reports. Checkpoint also does analysis by tracking the logs and letting you know when you are under attack. What Juniper has today in comparison is not so good.

Juniper only has limited reports, such as memory, capacity, data, and traffic.

Since we have deployed the product, we have had two or three minor issues.

We have something like 12 million customers (mobile data customers).

Sometimes, it is difficult to contact the Juniper support because we did not purchase the support package, as it was too expensive. We are using a local reseller instead. Sometimes, when we have had issues, it can take one to three hours for resolution, which is not good at all based on our company standard. However, once we have the right thing connected on the device, then it's very fast.

I would rate the technical support as a seven out of ten. The support is skilled, but the cost is expensive.

We previously used Cisco ASA. The results were not good.

The initial setup is straightforward. We had the help of the local provider. So, it was very straightforward. 

Even now, when I compare the initial setup to Cisco, the implementation of Juniper SRX is very simple.

To finish the implementation, we had the help of the local provider, Ericsson.

From the design phase up to the implementation phase, it took more than one month per site. The time to validate the design documents and change, then doing those changes, approve those changes and implementing them. Because we have two sites, it was somewhere around three months.

After the acquisition phase, we discussed the plan and the design document. We did the architecture and design document with the vendor. Before going into the implementation phase, we have to validate all our documents for the high-level and low-level designs. The operational teams are also validating these documents.

Once we have all those documents validated, we request the approval for change. We have a committee who analyzes the documentation. We analyze the work that we are planning to do and validate the changes for a specific time.

We need to look if there any impact on the customer side, do we need to present it to the customer before making the change, and what is the plan for monitoring after the change?

The direct support with Juniper is expensive. When you stop using the solution and miss one year of payments, if you want the support back on a specific node, they ask you to pay for the year that you haven't used the node.

We tried to move our mobile data firewall from Juniper SRX to Cisco ASA. What we found was that Cisco did not performing well at all. We were very disappointed by the Cisco solution. With the Cisco solution, we had more memory issues with the same amount of traffic. With Juniper SRX, it just needs an upgrade to carry the traffic.

We have approved vendors in every industry. We cannot deviate and chose any vendor that we want. We can only select vendors from our approved list. The two vendors on that list for this industry include Cisco and Juniper, though recently Huawei was added.

Make sure to have skilled local support.

We are planning to move to the bigger version of Juniper SRX later this year (SRX5800). We are also planning to move to IPv6.

Juniper SRX Series Firewall has a lot of opportunities in Bangladesh. The enterprise service is basic, serving as a gateway for Juniper networks. It facilitates network-to-network connectivity and operates as a next-generation firewall. It provides exceptional protection, scalability, and integration of security services. 

The main features are safeguarding their data and ensuring robust security services for organizational data.

Both network and cloud environments require security measures such as traffic protection, intrusion prevention, and antivirus solutions to ensure shared protection.

In some cases, customers encounter issues related to network interfaces, while others prioritize security concerns. These aspects are of utmost importance from the customer's perspective. The customers value stability and seek high performance.

I have been using Juniper SRX Series Firewall for three years. 

The solution is highly stable. I rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is very scalable and I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

Ultimately, when customers encounter challenges, they reach out to us for assistance. We then establish a schedule and allocate a skilled technical professional to provide support. We initiate the process by creating a ticket for Juniper Service Centers' service team. The service team is very good and the response rate is quite fast. 

Positive

The initial setup is easy and the deployment takes one week. I rate the setup a ten out of ten. 

The pricing appears to be cost-effective, and the cost is quite reasonable within Bangladesh and other countries, though it may vary based on global currency fluctuations. Currently, we have challenges related to product delivery and meeting the delivery schedule. It would be beneficial if we could improve the production lead time, making it shorter.

I would rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. 

We use Juniper for EEE routing and we also use the gateway feature.

The most valuable features are routing and policy security.

The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control.

The Juniper SRX protects against DDoS attacks. 

When we first tested the serial interface on our model, it did not work.

It should be easier to escalate support tickets.

We have been working with Juniper SRX for eight or nine years.

We sized this solution based on our bandwidth, so scalability has not been a problem.

The support that we receive from the partner is good. They are available if you are looking for a replacement or an upgrade, and they worked with me when it came to sizing the router according to our bandwidth.

They were also able to find a workaround to the problem that we were having with the serial interface not working on our SRX550-M.

The only issue with technical support is that it depends on the escalation.

We also have a small number of Cisco routers but we rely primarily on Juniper. The Cisco products are more expensive.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Overall, this is a really good product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I like the routing and firewall features.

The workplace management console needs improvement. It should be a little bit more developed. Also, the interface needs a bit more improvement.

If the solution would have an intuitive interface would be much better because the work-based interface is not so perfectly developed and it's not ideal. It's not complete yet, and it makes it difficult for beginners and first-time users of this solution. As it is, for new users, it would make it very difficult for them to deploy this solution. Otherwise, the rest is fine. There's no other problem with it.

In terms of stability, everything was okay except for one situation which happened about three years ago. There was an upgrade which was released. Once we got the upgrade on the software, it would crash and it wouldn't work as it had before, so we had to downgrade to the previous version. Once we started using that there was no problem.

Due to sanctions, we haven't used the technical support of the original company so the maintenance and everything is done by us.

We were using a different solution, a Microsoft solution. We were looking for a more affordable solution which would suit our needs.

The initial setup was difficult the first time. It was a little bit complicated, but after it was done, we've been using it just fine and there's no problem with the use. It was the first time we were using a firewall, the initial setup procedure took about one month to define all the zones. 

We extend the license yearly and the prices, because of the sanctions, are expensive and costs much more compared to other solutions. It's pricey compared to other locations where there are representatives and you can buy directly from them.

At the moment the solution satisfies our needs. There are no extra features that we need at the moment.

I would rate this solution 8.5 out of 10 because it seems to satisfy our needs. Everything seems good and works fine.

The solution is used for security purposes.

The security features and the model collection are the most valuable.

I think improvement can be done to the security part, particularly the UDM, and the product should have a user-friendly interface similar to FortiGate.

It should have the Azure RBAC in the next release.

I have been using this solution for more than ten years.

The product is quite stable. I would give it a seven out of ten.

We are using a hardware appliance and we have to choose a size based on our business. It is not like a software application, like in a cloud model.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

The customer support team is good. I recommend contacting them if any support is needed.

We are using Verax and also FortiGate products. We use them simultaneously.

The installation was not very complex, it was rather easy. It took around one hour to complete the installation.

We evaluated the Cisco 1400 series.

I would give it a seven out of ten.