Juniper SRX Series Firewall Reviews

We primarily use the solution for a small office.

The solution works very well in small offices.

The CLI works perfectly.

Technical support has been very helpful overall.

They offer very good administration capabilities.

The solution could cost less. It's a bit expensive right now.

The solution sometimes takes a long time to deliver the products. We're often waiting for stock. They should just have the product available and ready to go when customers need it.

I've been using the solution for about 15 years at this point. It's been a long time. It's been well over a decade.

The solution is pretty stable. We haven't had any issues in that regard. It's reliable.

The solution can scale, however, it's often difficult to get a hold of the product itself. We're often waiting on orders.

The solution seems to work well in small offices. I'm not sure how well it would do in larger enterprises.

The solution offers very good technical support. We've found them to be helpful and responsive. We don't have anything to complain about. Their service has been good so far.

We did previously use a solution called NetScreen.

The pricing is a bit expensive. They need to work on their pricing models.

We're currently looking at Fortinet as an option. Currently, this solution is fine for a smaller office, however, we're curious to see if there's a solution that may be better suited for a larger setup.

We're an official Juniper partner.

I don't typically work with the user interface. I deal more often with the CLI, and that works very well. I'm not really able to comment too much on usability for those who need a user interface to operate the solution.

I'd recommend the solution. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at an eight. For the most part, we've been pretty happy with it.

I've found the security features, such as IDS and the VPN most valuable.

In terms of other features, I'd like to see a web filter, 10 point control, application control and DNA features in the next release.

We previously didn't use a different solution.

I would rate this solution a 7 out of 10.

Our primary use case is consultation and deployment of the solution. We operate as a Juniper Elite Partner. Our customers, large enterprises, want to prevent network failure and downtime.

Improvements can be made to the GUI. The GUI can be improved by creating policies to handle IPS requirements. The configuration should be a one-step process. This would make it easier to complete the setup to register the time of operation.

Yes, it's very stable.

It's scalable. Juniper Select has a solution to boot in high availability technology. We use the Juniper Select from low-end and high-end. In my position as a Senior Network Security Engineer, I handle the high-end suite of Juniper Select 5K.

Currently, the solution is being used every day. We have plans to increase usage in the future.

Technical support is good. They seem to understand our customer's requirements. When they troubleshoot or support our customers, they seem to know what they are doing. They seem to be very helpful. But customers need support right away, and this has been an issue. It can take two to three days to get help some times just because of the volume of ticket request. 

Previously we used a CISCO ASA solution. But in the last three years, we switched to the Juniper solution because Juniper has a competitive price per feature.

The initial setup was complex. It took a group of five, engineers and architects, to get it up and running within 24-hours. And it takes a group of five, engineers and IT experts, to operate and maintain

Licensing which covers maintenance is on an annual basis. Our customers are on one-year contracts. There are additional cost above and beyond the standard licensing fees.

Before choosing Juniper, we evaluated a Fortinet solution because Fortinet has a competitive price. It's also effortless for our engineers to operate and maintain. They can understand and complete tasks quickly. 

Further advice regarding this solution is that anyone planning to implement this product should understand the Juniper suite. They should understand the firewall concept, Juniper configuration, and the command line. They need previous experience with Juniper products. 

On a scale from one to ten, one being the worst and ten being the best I'd give Juniper SRX an overall rating of eight because of its' competitive price. But it's a very complex product compared with other similar products.

The Juniper SRX that we have is being used as a firewall. Somehow, it is performing.

The product is a normal router with basic firewall capacity. We don't have a dedicated firewall. Therefore, I don't have high expectations from Juniper. 

It helps us perform our daily jobs.

We are using it as a normal type of firewall.

I would like them to add a dashboard because it's difficult to operate.

The product only has basic features.

The stability is normal.

The scalability is normal.

I haven't used technical support, just local support.

The initial setup was complex.

It is not that expensive.

We are evaluating Palo Alto, Barracuda, and Sophos because we need a Next-Gen firewall.

It crashed, and we could not change it for some reason. I don't want to keep Juniper within my network anymore.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

• Dedicated support team
• Easy configuration.

The primary use case of this solution is as a high-capacity firewall.

It was very difficult to deal with and required a lot of support, and the UI is very poor. 

I didn't like this product at all.

We faced many issues with the power supply causing many outages with this SRX box.

We experienced outage issues when load-balancing between two availability architectures, which had an effect on the availability.

Once we started to deal with this solution, it was very difficult to troubleshoot. It was not straightforward at all when comparing to Cisco. 

We always had support tickets. More than 50 tickets per month exceeded the SLA by more than two weeks.

Better support is needed.

In the next release, this solution needs to be stable, offer better support, better pricing, and less expensive to migrate.

I have been using Juniper SRX for more than five years.

We are using the latest version but will be dismantling this product soon.

It is not stable at all. There are many outages.

We will not continue using this solution.

We did not have problems with scaling, as we have less than 500 users in our organization.

Technical support was not helpful.

The support was horrible. Once we started our investigation, we were faced with another support engineer calling to go over the first steps again. We needed to restart the investigation from the beginning of the week.

The installation was not straightforward.

It took more than one month to set it up.

We had a team of three technicians to implement this solution.

One of the main reasons for dismantling this solution is that were asked to migrate the old books to the new books using Juniper and to transfer the policies and firewalls by using licensing. 

It was very expensive to upgrade to their products. 

The product itself is costly and the price of migration is very high.

I do not recommend this product and instead, would recommend using FortiGate.

I would rate Juniper SRX a zero. I would not even give it a one out of ten.

We use it as a firewall at our head office and branches. We use its IDS solution at the head office too.

It did not improve our safety because the IDS does not detect some attacks, but our anti-virus software did.

• Correct the bugs in the current version. 
• Help customers more with its configuration so they can feel safer.

We tried configuring the IDS for more than four months, but it did not work properly.

The primary use case of this solution is a traditional firewall.

We use Juniper SRX for the site-to-site VPN.

The IPSec configuration is going well.

We are experiencing some issues with the clustering. It needs to be simplified and more stable.

Some of the features included in SRX need improvement. For example, if you want to change your SSH port number, you cannot go into the application layer. You will have to go to the shell command to change the port. This is a problem because when you show the configuration, you cannot see what was put in the shell. It should easier.

Also, the user interface is a bit slow.

In the future, I would like to see the UI more responsive. The new generation doesn't use SSH anymore. One-click would be better.

I have been using Juniper SRX for approximately six years.

A few years ago, we were using the SRX240 now we are using a more recent version.

We deploy on SRX to handle 500 sites.

We will continue to use this solution in the future. We have no plans to change.

The technical support is a lot better because when we log a case, they respond.

We also use Fortinet FortiGate and I have some experience and knowledge of Cisco ASA.

It's not too complicated. It's plug and play.

The most challenging is when you upload the ISO. Deployment is less than one hour.

The installation is completed in-house.

We are not a large company, we have a team of less than five for deployment and maintenance.

I would recommend this solution for those who are interesting in using it for a VPN.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for our transport domain's server. We handle booking and billing using the solution.

I got to learn CLI after purchasing the solution. It counts as a benefit for me.

The solution's valuable features are excellent customer service and stability.

They should work on the pricing. I am using VPN and need to pay for its warranty and license separately. It needs to be addressed.

We have been using the solution for three years now.

It is a stable solution. We never faced any issues there.

If you have experience using the solution, it is scalable. 

The solution's initial setup process was lengthy as I was new to Juniper. I had to explore and learn the steps to implement the solution. Even after that, there was no guarantee that it would work fine. So that wasn't very easy.

I suggest adding more articles or blogs regarding the deployment and configuration part.

We had an engineer to help us deploy it, and the process lasted nearly six months.

I rate the solution's pricing as a four.

The solution is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. Also, I advise others to add chargeable features in the initial setup. If it increases the price of the device, that's fine.

I rate the solution as a seven.