Cisco Secure Firewall ASA Virtual - PAYG

Our company's use case for Cisco Secure Firewall  is to separate and protect the different server network ranges in our data center and to provide access to and from those services that sit in our data center to users and customers alike. We also use Cisco Secure Firewall  on the edge to provide internet access to and from the internet for our business.

The most valuable aspect of Cisco Secure Firewall for me is not a specific feature but the fact that it is quite stable as a firewall overall. It is not too buggy or disruptive when performing our day-to-day operations, and that is the main thing about it.

Centralized management of Cisco Secure Firewall benefits our organization because we have multiple firewalls, but we go to one single page or use the Firewall Management  Center to administer policies and make changes. This allows us to see what is going on from a visibility perspective, so all troubleshooting, configuration, and administration of the firewall happens at one single place, which is beneficial.

A single pane of glass for management is available.

One thing I would improve in Cisco Secure Firewall is somehow embedding the capability to use an asterisk-type of firewall rules in the access control policy. An example could be star.google.com; being able to use an asterisk for anything in the subdomain would be beneficial, as I know some of Cisco's competitors allow that on their firewalls, which eliminates the need for an additional appliance to facilitate that component.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for about five years.

Currently, Cisco Secure Firewall has been up and running for about three years since its last reboot, so it is quite stable.

I find the solution to be scalable, especially with the other products that Cisco is developing. For instance, Cisco Secure Cloud now allows us to potentially take the management functions of Cisco Secure Firewall, move it into the cloud, and integrate it with other Cisco security products, managing everything from one single pane.

I have worked with Cisco's customer support.

When it comes to customer support, referring to TAC, I find that Cisco's support stands out. It is very important for us as a business to have that support when needed, and Cisco has often never failed in providing that support.

If I were to rate the support overall from one to ten, I would give it a nine.

While I rate it a nine, to make it a ten, it could be improved based on individual cases. Some support people truly embody Cisco's values in responding and assisting, but there are times when some individuals may not be as helpful as others, leading to a disconnect in the support experience.

Deploying Cisco Secure Firewalls  is quite straightforward, as Cisco provides a lot of available documentation online, extensive support, and training, which makes it easy for engineers and customers to use Cisco products effectively.

The deployment time for Cisco Secure Firewalls  varies. Currently, I am going through a refresh where we are replacing older Firepower systems with newer ones, but in the past, it has been relatively simple, typically taking within an hour or two to get everything up and running.

I have been part of the deployment of Cisco Secure Firewalls.

From a return on investment perspective, I think Cisco Secure Firewalls keep our organization safe and protect the organization's image from a governance standpoint. With cybersecurity being a big issue in the world, Cisco Secure Firewalls protect data, the environment, organization, and keep things safe. It is always reassuring for customers to know that the organization I work for invests in products like Cisco Secure Firewall to protect ourselves.

Cisco Secure Firewall is similar to insurance in that it provides peace of mind.

I rate Cisco Secure Firewalls a nine overall. While there are features I think could be added to achieve a perfect ten, I still regard it higher than its competitors. From both a technical and peace of mind perspective, Cisco Secure Firewall is the frontrunner.

I would tell someone considering purchasing Cisco Secure Firewalls that they will not be disappointed. My overall review rating for Cisco Secure Firewall is nine.

Cisco Secure Firewall 's main use case is the edge firewall, which has great IPS and IDS capabilities, providing a solid defense layer for the organization.

I really appreciate the NAT-ting feature of Cisco Secure Firewall  the most.

The main benefit of the NAT-ting feature in Cisco Secure Firewall is that when I establish a site-to-site tunnel with another endpoint from another company, I can provide them with a fake IP instead of the real IP.

Cisco Secure Firewall benefits our organization by serving as the first defense layer, which is the edge firewall as I mentioned before, helping to prevent DDoS attacks and similar threats.

I think Cisco Secure Firewall could become even better overall, but as of now, it is already in a stable status, and I do not see any significant features that need immediate attention. Perhaps something will come up in the future.

Cisco Secure Firewall is a stable and reliable product.

Cisco Secure Firewall remains stable because even if there are bugs, Cisco TAC engineers are consistently working to find solutions on the spot.

I am not experiencing any downtime with Cisco Secure Firewall.

There are bugs in Cisco Secure Firewall, but as I mentioned, the TAC engineers are actively working to resolve issues as quickly as possible, so the downtime is only for a short period.

I have experienced bugs with Cisco Secure Firewall, such as a sudden reboot, for example, but they resolved it on the spot.

Cisco Secure Firewall scales with the growing needs of an organization and has scalability.

Cisco Secure Firewall definitely demonstrates scalability, though I cannot explain it exactly.

I find that customer support from Cisco is good, as the TAC engineers are available all the time.

If I could rate Cisco Secure Firewall's support on a scale from one to ten, I would give it a ten.

The deployment model for Cisco Secure Firewall is on-premises.

My experience with deploying Cisco Secure Firewall is that it is complicated, but if you have the experience, you can deploy it smoothly.

There is a high learning curve for the deployment of Cisco Secure Firewall.

I have seen ROI with Cisco Secure Firewall, as they definitely save time and provide peace of mind.

Cisco Secure Firewall saves time and also saves money, definitely providing peace of mind.

My impression of the pricing and licensing of Cisco Secure Firewall is that it is not the normal pricing; it is high, but they deserve it.

They bring great value for the price because they provide excellent support, have stability, and we trust this product.

I would rate Cisco Secure Firewall a nine on a scale from one to ten. I rate it a nine because there is one point regarding the bugs that the versions of Cisco in general have.

My advice to other organizations considering Cisco Secure Firewall is to ensure that customers receive guidance from TAC engineers regarding bugs and workarounds when they are published. It is crucial to expedite the process of finding bugs before deploying new versions.

We are running Cisco Secure Firewall  firewalls as edge devices. It is very good to have FTD, a device like FTD and FMC for management of the devices.

I am Ahmed from Palestine, working with a service provider company for mobile and landlines. Our company, Jawwal, is a service provider for Palestine with about 3,000 employees serving all people in Palestine. We used to have Cisco devices and also other vendors because our security team always asks to have multiple vendors in our company. We are very happy to have Cisco Secure Firewall  devices. Our favorite features are that it is the next-generation firewall, always providing an IPS capability and multi-homing for multiple devices, clustering, and similar functionalities. We also appreciate FMC for management. It is a very good and very strong device to have in our company. We use it as edge firewalls for our company. We have three data centers spread all around the country. We always use Cisco and try to bring Cisco devices to our company because we always have something new.

Cisco Secure Firewall has many features, so the most important thing in the next-generation firewall is an IPS and URL filtering. It is a very good experience to have FTD for IPS and URL filtering.

My favorite feature inside the firewall is an IPS integrated with Threat Defense. I would like to highlight some protection. I would like to mention something about the intelligence for the firewall. We are very much looking forward to having AI included in the firewalls from Cisco, and I am looking to know how I can get benefits from AI inside Cisco Secure Firewall devices. We are always looking for improvement for the devices, and Cisco is always doing that. The most benefit for the firewalls in our company, regarding protection, intrusion prevention, and URL filtering, is a very good feature to have.

We faced some issues, though they are not very big issues in the device. When managing these devices from FMC, we have some tricky points for the device flexibility regarding upgrade from one FMC to another FMC and bringing the devices inside to be managed by this FMC. This also applies regarding the flexibility for having the data or the device when upgrading from one hardware to another hardware. To make it more easily to have this configuration from this device to another device would be beneficial.

When upgrading, Cisco always makes something called end of life for the hardware devices. When going from one device to another device, it is very hard to have this configuration exported from this device and put it in another device. This affects our service continuity, potentially causing some interruption for our service provider because we are running in a very critical environment. This may affect our user experience.

The only bad experience is that exporting and importing from one device is problematic. If trying to make a scalable device to increase capability for the device, it is very hard to export the configuration from this device to another device. We have to do it manually. This is a very bad experience, but other things are very good.

We have been using this solution for more than seven years.

At IT, every time we may have something like this, but it is perhaps not related to the device itself. It depends on very wide other reasons. Sometimes, we have some downtimes because of something unknown, perhaps from the Linux kernel. Cisco engineers are always listening to us and contacting us for any improvement, which is why we love Cisco.

In the network world, there is nothing straightforward. We always have obstacles on our way. Cisco is very good regarding availability and the stability for the device. When something happens in the device, the failover happens very quickly without any interruption. This is our experience with Cisco, and we are looking forward to having more and more. It is not straightforward because of the complexity of the network. As a device, it is straightforward, but because of the complexity of the other things, we can find it not hard, but a little bit complex. It is not related to the device itself.

Cisco technical support is always doing a great job. While supporting us during our maintenance window for downtimes, it is very good. We are trying to have better support, and it is about financial issues because if going up with the support level, it becomes better and better. We need to make it more equitable.

Companies are always looking for security. If needing to have a secure firewall with high throughput and heavy-duty devices, we always have to choose Cisco devices because the reality of these devices may be better than any other vendor. Other vendors are very good also, but sometimes Cisco is more flexible than others.

We have to use solutions such as IPS and IDS also. It is in detection and IPS for prevention also, but it is a different device, so it may have added layers for our network and making problems around that experience we have with it. It is not because of the device or the vendor, but layers in the network making some delays and making some overhead on the network. Cisco is the vendor we use. When comparing devices financially, we can see that other devices have very advanced features and other vendors have very good advantages. Cisco always wins. Maybe it is financially good because we have very high features and there are real advantages and features. Regarding throughput, some other vendors say it is fake throughput, not like Cisco. Cisco, when they say one gig, it is one gig.

We have many models such as 2000, 2003, and 4005. We have about eight devices spread around the company. I would give Cisco Secure Firewall a rating of eight out of ten because we are always looking for improvement. Cisco is very stable. From my experience, Cisco Secure Firewall is very stable. Because of the many integrations with the ICE and SGT, it is very nice to have these features. We always can see improvements on Cisco.

My use case for Cisco Secure Firewall  includes secure access into the network, remote access VPN, site-to-site VPN, NAT, and access control.

I believe the most valuable feature of having the FTD in Cisco Secure Firewall  is that it is typically managed through FMC, which is a tool that allows you to manage multiple devices. The ability to manage, view, and push templates across multiple devices at one time is beneficial versus having to manually do it.

Cisco Secure Firewall helps organizations improve by making networking easier, as they have provided a graphical user interface for much of the functionality. I think people prefer the GUI and find it easier to navigate versus having to remember commands, making it excellent for both novice and senior engineers.

If I could improve Cisco Secure Firewall, I feel that even with my experience, I have difficulty navigating some of the logs and trying to find specific flows, whether it is the source address or the pre-NAT address. I find the filtering very difficult to navigate and determine exactly what field I have to put the criteria in, as there are too many fields.

I probably started using Cisco Secure Firewall at the beginning of the pandemic, around 2021, while I was using ASAs before that, which had been for approximately 10 years. I have used FTD and Firepower for approximately five years and ASA  for approximately 10 years.

I believe Cisco Secure Firewall is stable because I have never seen it crash and I have never seen it fail to forward packets.

My experience with customer support for Cisco Secure Firewall is positive, as they are helpful. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Cisco Secure Firewall customer support as a nine, with ten being best.

I have briefly looked at some marketing materials for other firewall solutions such as Palo Alto, Fortinet, and FortiGate to understand where they are in the market, but I have never really managed or configured those platforms.

The complexity of deploying Cisco Secure Firewall varies depending on how many you have deployed. When I first deployed it, I still had to refer to documentation and conduct some trial and error, as we had to reconfigure some elements because of the interesting environment where we had to port-channel separately instead of as one bundled channel in an HA cluster. The complexity really depends on the environment.

I have deployed Cisco Secure Firewall with some customers.

I believe the market space for firewall solutions is crowded, and these vendors need to be competitive. I find that they are all quite similar.

Cisco Secure Firewall  is used for securing perimeters, such as internal or external perimeters of the network.

I consider a valuable feature of Cisco Secure Firewall  to be that it serves its purpose. ASA  is nice, but it is outdated now. When it comes to FTD, complexity is one of the things. I am not sure they should build it from scratch.

Cisco Secure Firewall has helped improve my company over the last 15 years. Nowadays, you cannot live without a firewall. We are currently moving to another vendor.

Navigating through Cisco Secure Firewall is not intuitive. Complexity is another significant issue that needs to be addressed.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for 15 years.

Cisco Secure Firewall is working with some bugs and glitches, but it is stable overall. ASA  is a super stable firewall, even though it is outdated nowadays. FTD is working fine with some glitches.

Scalability depends on which Cisco Secure Firewall you are buying. For the enterprise level, it is scalable, but not significantly.

I have contacted Cisco support about these issues and opened many TAC cases for the firewalls.

I would evaluate Cisco support as good. Cisco is the best there. However, they need to rebuild this product. I love Cisco products, but when it comes to the firewall, I do not.

We are transitioning to Palo Alto.

I find Palo Alto to be much easier to operate and much more stable. If you want to incorporate FTD with another Cisco product, then you need to go with Cisco to have the full ecosystem. Since we do not have that requirement, we are going to another vendor, which is definitely easier to handle.

I have knowledge about the pricing and licensing.

A couple of days ago, I was working on a project and received a quote for the FTD 1230. For the same level with Palo Alto, even though we had a huge discount with Cisco, it turned out to be more expensive than Palo Alto. The pricing is quite expensive. My overall review rating for this product is 6.