We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and KerioControl based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It performs very well."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is security. They are known for efficiency and are on the top of Gartner Quadrant reviews. Fortinet FortiGate has an easy-to-use platform with a good graphical interface. The configuration is simple and the solution provides an overall good layer of security."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"The solution is stable."
"The performance is good."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco IOS Security is posturing."
"The product is easy to use."
"I'm able to transfer data over internet network security. With the GRE I'm able to transfer data within one bunch to another bunch in a public way, like the internet. The communication is encrypted and is private. It gives me added privacy."
"Cisco IOS Security has many good features, but compared to other solutions, it has a more user-friendly interface with steps to apply and manage rules. Another good part of the solution is that it's more straightforward."
"The capabilities for scalability with this product are huge"
"The most valuable features of Cisco IOS Security are the plenty of functionality it provides, many people are IT certified the usage, and the user interface is good."
"We use Cisco IOS Security mostly for routers to route off the firewall. It's a next-generation device."
"Cisco products are very secure and integrate easily with other devices."
"The flexibility of the system, the capacity to provide the right level of security, and the ability to be integrated into different kinds of infrastructures are the most valuable features."
"Compared to other solutions, accounting and live monitoring of firewall status are very good features in KerioControl."
"The user interface and the ease of use are pretty good. Everything fits together so nicely."
"I have found the most valuable features of Kerio Control to be the IPS and firewall."
"One very good thing about the Kerio device is its authentication. I don't have a Windows domain for authentication. Instead, I use the Kerio product because it can separate users by Mac addresses and give them IP addresses based on their usernames, automatically logging them in. This makes for a very simple authentication system."
"The product is affordable."
"The most valuable feature is to provide users with the ability to log in to the portal page, keep track of their data usage and perform bandwidth management."
"Kerio has improved my organization's security."
"The integration with third-party tools may be something that they should work on."
"We would like to see a better training platform implemented."
"It could use better throughput on some of the smaller boxes for the branch offices."
"Some of the filtering is not robust, you can escape it with a VPN. Some of the users bypass some of the filters. It catches some but it also misses some, that area could be improved. It's functioning reasonably but there's room for improvement in that area."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"There are just some services that aren't available. For example, the Ethernet or point-to-point protocols. They could add these services to their product offering - especially services for ISPs."
"It could use more templates for third-party site-to-site VPN setups other than FortiGate and Cisco."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"I would love it if it has a link-by-link feature, integration with Unified Threat Management (UTM), and load balancers. They haven't got any link-by-link feature right now, which can be a very attractive option. This link-by-link feature can also be made available for Cisco's UTM firewalls. The link-by-link feature is available in some of the other firewalls. Currently, integration with UTM is missing. Cisco IOS Security also doesn't have the load balancers and a few things that need to be done to get a good UTM firewall. Normally, other firewalls have UTM. As a next-generation firewall, it's good, but as a UTM, it has to do some work."
"I think setup could be one area for improvement, because sometimes we don't have people inside so we have to move to the place."
"Cisco is a scalable product, but it is expensive compared to other vendors."
"It would be ideal if the solution had more capacity."
"Cisco very slowly introduces and implements the products, unlike other brands."
"The initial setup is complicated."
"The graphical user interface or the GUI could be better. Beginners can use some devices with the GUI, but some security devices are configured using CLI. It would also be better if it had its own Intrusion Protection Service and Intrusion Detection Service on the server."
"Sometimes I find it difficult to manage. Some configurations are difficult for new engineers, for example."
"The one thing that did put me off of the solution was that, after they were taken over by GFI, the licensing and a few other items have gotten very complicated."
"The product's technical support is not good as it used to be."
"My experience with the solutions technical support is fine but they could be faster in responding."
"There isn't a lot to be improved. It works well as it is, but they can maybe improve the reporting side."
"I would like for there to be a difference between international and national links."
"I would like to see them develop a bit more flexibility creating VLANs."
"The solution can be improved to create the capability for larger bandwidths that support our business needs."
"The GUI should be changed because it remains the same consistency across versions. However, those who have been using KerioControl for a long time may be accustomed to the current interface. Installing a new version in the same location makes it easy to find, but overall, there are no notable changes between versions."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while KerioControl is ranked 29th in Firewalls with 54 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while KerioControl is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of KerioControl writes "With VPN, any of our guys can log in to the system and effectively be on board; helps with our customers all over the world". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS, Netgate pfSense and OPNsense, whereas KerioControl is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos UTM, Sophos XG and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. KerioControl report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
