We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall vs Juniper SRX based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are very comparable. Each of them have a good set of features, and the solution you choose will ultimately be dependent on your company’s specific preferences and requirements.
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and there are several operating systems that can include the hardware capacities. In the newer releases, the resources were more useful because they were included in the operating system."
"Fortinet offers the latest versions to cater to the needs of enterprises."
"The web tutor and automatic rules by schedule are good features."
"It performs very well."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"It's a user-friendly firewall. Most of the tasks are very simple. It's simple to configure and troubleshoot this firewall."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"Their performance is most valuable."
"I haven't had any major problems so I haven't had to open a ticket with technical support."
"The ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager) which is the graphical user interface, works out, and Cisco keeps it current."
"I think Cisco ASA Firewall is the most stable firewall solution."
"The whole firewall functionality, including firewall policies and IPS policies, is valuable. It has all kinds of functionalities. It has IPS, VPN, and other features. They are doing quite a lot of stuff with their devices."
"When it comes to the integration among Cisco tools, we find it easy. It's a very practical integration with other components as well."
"So far, it has been very stable."
"The high-availability features, the VPN and the IPSec, are our top three features."
"It helps us perform our daily jobs."
"Juniper is a highly flexible platform, and you get more bang for your buck compared to a Cisco product."
"The rollback option and Commit Confirmed are great features. They give us the security to change configurations without downtime."
"It protects from distributed denial-of-service attacks with Screen Options."
"Troubleshooting with the solution is quite easy. If you compare the process to, for example, Fortigate, Juniper is much easier."
"The solution has proven to be quite stable."
"The security features and the model collection are the most valuable."
"It's fine, and it's good. It's very stable."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"In terms of what could be improved, the SD-WAN is quite difficult, because if you install the new box, 15 is okay, but if you change from an old configuration, if there is already configuration and a policy when you change to SD-WAN, you must change the whole policy that you see in the interface."
"It does not have key authentication for admin access."
"There are some tiny bugs that sometimes affect the operations. In the past revision of it, there was a bug. Because of the bug, we had to downgrade the version. It happened only with the last revision."
"Compared to some other products, the DLP is not at par for the moment."
"There is a lot of improvement needed with SSL-VPN."
"Cisco Meraki products are rising very quickly in the cloud and the connected era. Meraki products offer much better ROI, upgradability, and manageability."
"The user interface isn't as good as it could be. They should work to improve it. It would make it easier for customer management if it was easier to use."
"It could also use a reporting dashboard."
"We have to rely on Cisco ASDM to access the firewall interface. This needs improvement. Because we have a web-based interface, and it is a lot more user-friendly."
"They should work on making it a little more intuitive for users and not quite as complex. Still, it's a good product."
"While this applies to all vendors, pricing can be always lower. In my opinion, Cisco is the most expensive. The pricing can be reduced."
"The ease of use needs improvement. It is complex to operate the solution. The user interface is not friendly."
"With regards to stability, we had a critical bug come out during our evaluation... not good."
"I was just trying to learn how this product actually operates and one thing that I see from internal processing is it does fire-walling and then sends it to the IPS model and any other model that needs to be performed. For example, content checking or filtering will be done in a field processing manner. That is something that causes delays in the network, from a security perspective. That is something that can be improved upon. Palo Alto already has implemented this as a pilot passed processing. So they put the same stream of data across multiple modules at the same time and see if it is giving a positive result by using an XR function. So, something similar can be done in the Cisco Firepower. Instead of single processing or in a sequential manner, they can do something similar to pile processing. Internal function that is something that they can improve upon."
"It's a good stable firewall, but it's nowhere near what it needs to be for a next-generation type firewall."
"The setup process should be improved."
"Ongoing costs are something that we need to manage and make sure that we're getting value on."
"In the next release, I would like to have a better web interface. It needs to be more user-friendly. Right now, you can only access many features through the console."
"J-Web, Juniper Web, is sometimes not working great when users are increasing their internet use. Additionally, they need to improve the GUI, graphical user interface, and the firewall management needs to improve. Their CLI is good, but sometimes the GUI is very slow."
"When I was going to upgrade the OS, the solution didn't accept certain USB devices."
"The GUI needs to be easier to handle."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 86 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Check Point NGFW, whereas Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Juniper SRX Series Firewall report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and best Firewalls 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.