We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center and Palo Alto Networks Panorama based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Scalability is not an issue as long as you are able to buy additional licenses. Ten percent of our customers use Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center, and we have large accounts with 50% of their end users behind this firewall."
"The most valuable feature of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is the UTM."
"It's a fine solution in terms of scalability."
"The platform has significantly enhanced our organization's operations by providing secure communication channels between different office locations."
"One of the most valuable features of Cisco Secure Firewalls is their seamless integration with other Cisco products."
"The solution is quite scalable."
"Cisco's support and services are far superior to any other security product in Pakistan."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the intrusion prevention system."
"One valuable feature is centralized management. We are able to manage it centrally for two to three remote offices, our head office and our data centers. So, it is very simple to manage."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is its innovation and impressive capacity to handle network traffic efficiently."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"Overall, the functionality was very good."
"It's helpful that the solution allows us to control all the firewalls from one device."
"Centralized management is a valuable feature."
"The solution is absolutely stable."
"Using this solution means that you can store logs for longer periods, up to perhaps two years, depending on your attached storage."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could improve by being less expensive."
"I had a challenging time trying to size the firewall on the cloud. Maybe the information is there, but I couldn't find it easily. Usually, it depends on the cloud provider itself, whether you use AWS or Azure. These guys give you the information, so this part is not as detailed."
"The IOS and the deploy option could be improved."
"It takes five to seven minutes to push one policy."
"The solution could improve the number of ports available and load balancing."
"Cisco firewalls use old ESR or a Linux system, and there are problems with encryption. When we switch on encryption, the throughput goes down."
"Some duplicated values and security standards are not working in some high-application protocols with Cisco's next-generation firewalls."
"Areas for improvement include pricing points and the range of products available at any given time."
"There is a need to improve the upgrade process. When we are upgrading the solution we are facing some issues with Elasticsearch services. Every time we upgrade it takes a long time to become stable."
"There could be more integrations with third parties."
"Storage in Palo Alto Networks Panorama needs improvement. My company also experienced deployment issues when the product was first installed, particularly when binding with the firewall. It's not as user-friendly because not everyone can deploy it without some knowledge."
"The general customer feedback is when saving the configuration, it takes a long time. That needs to be fixed. The troubleshooting, the debugging part is also a little bit of a pain. It's not user-friendly on the interface to do our debugging when comparing it with other firewalls, like Forcepoint."
"We have had some issues in the past because integrating a new device is not intuitive."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama has some bugs that could be fixed."
"It's difficult to implement."
"The product could use some method of allowing for more customization and open integration with other controls."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is ranked 7th in Firewall Security Management with 19 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is ranked 3rd in Firewall Security Management with 81 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center writes "A stable and reasonably priced product that protects organizations from malware". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama writes "Built-in proxy with the ability to maintain your own policies". Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, whereas Palo Alto Networks Panorama is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, AlgoSec, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, Tufin Orchestration Suite and FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF). See our Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.
