Cisco Secure Firewall ASA Virtual - BYOL

I use Cisco Secure Firewall to protect the accounting, finance, and accounting network at the gateway of our network.

I created a template for tuning intrusion detection and prevention signatures and encrypted traffic inspections, then applied it. I don't need to fine-tune it from time to time. My initial template applies because we are a public government agency and our processes are fairly straightforward. Our work is purely in the accounting and finance department with straightforward processes. I don't get to change or introduce new things into our workspace from time to time as it is strictly corporate government accounting. Based on that, I created an initial template for intrusion prevention and detection and there has not been much need to fine-tune it since then. I primarily monitor the system.

I appreciate the user-friendly GUI of Cisco Secure Firewall.

Among the main benefits I have seen from using Cisco Secure Firewall is real-time protection for the network and granular protection of our network.

My network and SOC teams use Cisco Secure Firewall connection events and threat intelligence telemetry during active incident triage and root cause analysis. I monitor my users and have other Microsoft systems and policies in place that enable me to monitor users and their systems and devices. I have very strict restrictions on what devices are allowed into my network. I really have not had any serious incidents. I did have security breaches prior to introducing Cisco Secure Firewall into my network, but since then, I really have not had any incidents.

I would like to see Cisco expand the range of features that are available without a subscription because the features of Cisco Secure Firewall are quite limited without a license subscription. I would like to see some features made license-free.

I would also appreciate improvement in updates and tech support. My last experience with tech support was not resolved on time as it took a very long time with a long chain of escalations. I would like to see improvement in those areas, particularly tech support.

I have been working with Cisco Secure Firewall for a couple of years now.

Concerning deep packet inspection and Snort rules, I observe no tradeoffs in throughput or latency across my data center and perimeter workloads. I would have considered less bandwidth consumption, but there are no tradeoffs that I could see.

I find Cisco Secure Firewall stable.

I have not faced any downtimes, crashes, or performance issues with it. The function of monitoring the firewall has been shifted to someone else and I am not the primary tech person managing the firewall at the moment, but prior to that, I did not have any such experiences.

Cisco Secure Firewall is scalable and easy to scale up and scale out.

On a scale of one to 10, I would rate the technical support of Cisco as six.

I did not encounter any technical differences and policy translation requirements when transitioning rule sets from legacy architecture or competing firewall platforms to Cisco because I just implemented Cisco Secure Firewall. I created my template and implemented Firepower directly. There were no prior firewalls that I had to transition from. Firepower has been running for me for approximately five years. I started fresh with Firepower and there were no legacy devices.

My experience with the deployment and setup process of Cisco Secure Firewall is that it was straightforward.

I got Cisco Secure Firewall from a channel partner. I tried to buy it directly, but I was told that I cannot buy directly from Cisco and have to go through a channel partner. I wish it was different. In the case of my 1100 series, I bought from a channel partner. I don't remember their name now, but I did not buy directly from Cisco because I was told that I could not.

I find Cisco Secure Firewall cost-effective and would say it brings value for money. However, it could be better.

My experience with the pricing aspect of Cisco is that it is quite high.

I chose Cisco because I am Cisco certified. I have been Cisco certified for years. I started my computer professional career with Cisco CCNA routing and switching, CCNA security, CCNP, and CCIE. I have been a Cisco person for as long as I can remember. I already had that orientation from my training and practice. I was using Cisco routers, switches, and other devices because I had a passion for cybersecurity and that is what my training exposed me to.

I am not sure how I manage rule proliferation and policy deployment cycles across my appliances with Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center.

I made some recommendations about two years ago regarding incorporating Cisco Secure Firewall APIs into my continuous integration, configuration management, or automated threat workflows. However, because we are also a government agency, I did not quite get approval before that function was shifted to someone else. I did make recommendations to enhance the license and incorporate a couple of features, but I did not quite get the needed approval. I have administrative bottlenecks.

I have not used AI in Cisco, specifically the AI-assisted recommendations, but I intend to and I hope to.

I have always been a Cisco person, so given my experience with Cisco technologies, I would always encourage people to go for Cisco-related technology.

My main use case for Cisco Secure Firewall is generic, focusing on normal L3, L4, and Layer 7 securities.

A specific example of how I use Cisco Secure Firewall in my environment is that we have production firewalls positioned between our separate zones, which allow us to segregate our LAN infrastructure and server infrastructure with the firewalls.

My main use case includes using Cisco AnyConnect for VPN connections, which is one of the biggest use cases, along with using it as a normal next-generation firewall for content filtering and Layer 4 security.

Cisco Secure Firewall offers very good threat engines as its best features.

Those threat engines, specifically Cisco Talos, help identify threats that can be exploited on zero-day vulnerabilities, and we used to see updates from Cisco Talos on a very regular basis, which is helpful for us.

Additionally, the Layer 4 security is phenomenal and very easy to use, even for network or security engineers, and it is easy to deploy as well as to make policies such as Layer 4 and Layer 7 policies.

Cisco Secure Firewall impacts my organization positively since we are using Cisco AnyConnect, and most users who work from home rely on it, facilitating content filtering, traffic filtering, and Layer 4 security for users in both remote and office settings.

This has led to easier management and minimum false positives, along with the reliability of the operating system, as we do not have to upgrade very frequently, alleviating the burden for security engineers regarding constant upgrades.

I believe Cisco Secure Firewall can be improved, particularly in the area of policy push speed, as it takes some time when we push a policy.

I have been using Cisco Secure Firewall for around four years.

Cisco Secure Firewall is very stable, particularly the operating system version, which maintains stability compared to other firewalls that frequently encounter vulnerabilities.

Cisco Secure Firewall has very good scalability, as we are enabling many modules while still observing strong firewall performance without issues.

Customer support for Cisco Secure Firewall is very good; we can reach them on the spot, and they are quite helpful, leading to my overall satisfaction with their support.

I previously used a different solution, which we switched from due to issues with that product.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing indicates that the licensing part is still pending, but it is very minimal and not very hard for our organization to move forward.

I have seen a return on investment since installing Cisco Secure Firewall, as we have observed very minimal false positives regarding threats, and using the same firewall for Cisco AnyConnect has saved us a lot of costs compared to our previous solution for remote VPN.

Before choosing Cisco Secure Firewall, I evaluated other options such as Sophos, Fortinet, and Palo Alto.

My advice for others looking into using Cisco Secure Firewall is to compare the feature sets, pricing, and the support Cisco provides, including the security modules like Cisco Talos and their threat feeds, as proper evaluation will likely lead to choosing this firewall.

As of now, we are not using a Zero Trust security model, but we have done proofs of concept that were very good, and we are planning to move towards Zero Trust.

I do not think I have used any new features or functionalities recently in Cisco Secure Firewall.

I have provided this review with an overall rating of 9.

I have been working with firewalls for more than eight years throughout my career, with extensive experience in network architecture and security design.

In my current role as a network architect, I evaluate firewall solutions based on the project RFP, client requirements, technical specifications, and consultant recommendations. My responsibility is to select and size the appropriate solution based on the specific requirements and use case of each project.

We use Cisco Secure Firewall in various network environments to secure WAN and perimeter traffic and to provide next-generation firewall capabilities, including IPS, IDS, URL and web filtering, application control, and SD-WAN for environments with multiple WAN links and high-availability requirements. Depending on the RFP and security architecture, Cisco Secure Firewall can also be deployed as a data center firewall to secure and control data center traffic.

For larger or more complex environments, we may implement a segmented firewall architecture, using dedicated firewalls for different security zones—for example, a WAN firewall, Internet/perimeter firewall, and DMZ firewall. The design depends on the traffic flows, security requirements, performance requirements, and overall architecture of the project.

Although Cisco is one of the firewall platforms we frequently deploy, we also work with other vendors depending on the project requirements. For example, some projects use Cisco for the perimeter firewall and Fortinet, Palo Alto Networks, or Sophos for the data center, while other projects may use Cisco for the data center and another vendor for the perimeter.

Ultimately, the firewall selection is driven by the customer's requirements, RFP specifications, technical use cases, performance and security needs, and the consultant's design. Using different firewall vendors across different security zones is sometimes a deliberate customer requirement or architectural decision.

One of the biggest strengths of Cisco Secure Firewall is the integration of multiple next-generation security capabilities into a single platform. For mid-sized deployments, a single firewall appliance can provide comprehensive perimeter security without requiring multiple standalone security solutions.

Key features include next-generation firewall capabilities, IPS/IDS, application control, URL and web filtering, VPN, malware and threat protection, and SD-WAN capabilities. Having these functions integrated into one platform provides centralized policy enforcement and better visibility into network traffic.

I particularly value the combination of firewall and threat-prevention capabilities because it allows organizations to inspect and control traffic at multiple levels rather than relying only on traditional stateful firewall policies. IPS and threat intelligence help identify and block malicious activity, while URL and web filtering provide additional protection against malicious or inappropriate destinations.

Another advantage is the scalability of the platform. Depending on the project requirements, Cisco Secure Firewall can be deployed for Internet and WAN security, perimeter protection, data center segmentation, or other security zones.

Overall, I would say its strongest feature is the ability to combine firewalling, threat prevention, traffic inspection, and secure connectivity into a unified security platform. This can simplify the architecture and operations while providing the security controls required for many enterprise environments.

One challenge is that many customers prefer a multi-vendor strategy. Since Cisco is already used for their core and access network, they often prefer Fortinet or Palo Alto Networks for the firewall to reduce vendor dependency and maintain architectural diversity.

The area for improvement is the configuration and deployment experience. Compared with other market vendors, Cisco Secure Firewall has a steeper learning curve and requires more hands-on expertise. FMC provides powerful centralized management, but it can also add complexity, particularly in multi-firewall deployments.

Cost is another consideration. In many projects, Cisco can be around 15 more expensive than competing solutions, depending on the model and licensing.

I would like to see Cisco simplify the management and deployment experience, improve automation, and provide more flexible and cost-effective licensing while maintaining its strong security capabilities.

Yes, based on my experience, Cisco Secure Firewall is very stable and reliable. I have deployed it for more than 20 customers across the Middle East and other locations, including hospitals, hotels, airports, and shopping malls.

I have not experienced any major firewall crashes or recurring stability issues in these deployments. The platform has been reliable across different environments and use cases, including high-availability and enterprise deployments.

From my experience, stability and reliability are among the strongest points of Cisco Secure Firewall. With proper sizing, configuration, and maintenance, I have found it to be a dependable platform for critical network environments.

Cisco Secure Firewall is highly scalable when it is properly sized with future growth in mind. In many projects, we recommend sizing the firewall with around 50% capacity reserved for future growth, depending on the customer's requirements and budget.

Cisco's newer firewall models also provide flexibility to upgrade interface and connectivity capabilities, such as moving from 10G to 25G, 40G, or 100G, depending on the specific model and available options.

However, scalability ultimately depends on selecting the right model and configuration from the beginning. If a customer selects a firewall based only on current requirements due to budget constraints, they may face performance or interface limitations as the network grows.

Overall, Cisco Secure Firewall provides good scalability, but proper initial sizing and planning for future capacity are critical.

I would rate Cisco TAC support 9 out of 10 based on my experience.

I regularly work with Cisco TAC, particularly when upgrading Cisco Secure Firewall to a latest stable release. For example, during our airport operations and maintenance projects, we open a TAC case before the upgrade and work with a Cisco engineer throughout the process. After the upgrade, we validate the firewall policies, rules, and overall functionality before closing the case.

Overall, Cisco TAC engineers are knowledgeable and effective, especially when dealing with complex issues. However, my experience over the last two to three years has been that the quality and speed of support can vary depending on the engineer assigned to the case. Sometimes the initial engineer requires multiple rounds of log collection and escalation before the issue reaches a senior engineer who can resolve it quickly.

For this reason, I would give Cisco TAC 9/10. The technical capability is strong, but faster access to experienced engineers and more consistent support quality would make the service even better.

I would rate Cisco Secure Firewall 10 out of 10 overall. I have hands-on experience sizing and configuring Cisco Secure Firewall through CCW based on customer requirements, and I also compare it with solutions from other vendors.

Cisco Secure Firewall is a stable and reliable platform with strong build quality and good hardware support. With the appropriate Smart Net service, hardware replacement can also be very fast when required.

From a sizing perspective, Cisco provides a good range of throughput and interface options, although comparable firewalls from other vendors may offer more interfaces at a similar price point..

My advice to organizations is to consider Cisco Secure Firewall when reliability, enterprise integration, security capabilities, and long-term support are priorities. However, customers should carefully evaluate sizing, licensing, interface requirements, and total cost against competing solutions before making the final decision.

I have been working with Cisco Secure Firewall for almost nine years, and I want to share my experience with this solution.

I have been working with both the on-premises and cloud versions of Cisco Secure Firewall.

The choice between deployment models depends on the use cases. For on-premises use cases, I deploy an on-premises firewall, but for workloads that are based on the cloud, I use the cloud-based firewall.

Cisco Secure Firewall has very good IDS and IPS capabilities, as well as excellent threat intelligence features, which are some of the best aspects of the product that I appreciate.

It actually helps with integration by allowing me to integrate different solutions within one platform.

I am not currently experiencing many drawbacks with Cisco Secure Firewall. However, since things are migrating to the cloud, the product needs to be more optimized for cloud environments.

Recently, AI-initiated threats have emerged, so Cisco Secure Firewall should have enhanced capabilities to counter AI threats.

I have 22 years of overall experience working in the software field.

The deployment for the product was not quite simple, but it was acceptable. I received support from Cisco during the process, so the overall experience was good.

I would rate the technical support from Cisco at an eight out of ten, with ten being the best.

I was assisted by a third party with the deployment.

I handle both the deployment and operations, so I personally participated in the deployment process.

The price for Cisco Secure Firewall is a bit high compared to other vendors.

Cisco Secure Firewall helps with a Zero Trust security model, and I am implementing a ZTNA access model. I have already implemented Zero Trust. Other vendors besides Cisco also provide ZTNA solutions. Fortinet and Palo Alto are all working with ZTNA and have moved into the ZTNA platform.

I would assess Cisco Secure Firewall's ability to unify different policies across my environment.

As a bank, I serve as the Chief Technology Officer at one of the largest banks in Pakistan, UBL, United Bank Limited, and we have Cisco Secure Firewall deployed at the bank in the data center. We apply unified policies across the environment because we have two data center core firewalls running at the production as well as DR site.

Cisco Secure Firewall, especially the next generation FTD firewalls, offers application visibility, the intrusion prevention system, advanced malware protection, Snort rules, and threat intelligence feed from Cisco's Talos cloud, which I find very useful.

Cisco Secure Firewall has provided us the ability to go a long way towards zero-trust architecture, which is useful in implementing because zero-trust architecture has many more features such as multi-factor authentication, encryption, and segmentation. We have integrated Cisco's ACI, the Application Centric Infrastructure, the software-defined networks with Cisco Secure Firewall to achieve micro-segmentation and a good, fair bit of zero-trust architecture.

We are using Cisco's XDR platform, which was previously labeled as Cisco SecureX. We have been using the Cisco XDR, Extended Detection and Response platform for the last two years, integrating Cisco Secure Firewall, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Umbrella service for secure DNS, as well as Cisco endpoints with the XDR platform. We have onboarded Cisco's MDR service, Managed Detection and Response service onto the XDR platform.

It has a very useful impact on productivity because when we integrate our ecosystem with the XDR platform, it operates on the AI algorithm, correlating and analyzing incidents for severity level by the AI algorithm, which gives the severity of the incident as well as eliminates false positives and provides it to the SOC level two analyst to contain or remediate the incident. This is a good feature and has automated somewhat the first level of incident response.

I am looking forward to Cisco for providing AI detection capability so that we have defenses against AI-assisted cyber attacks.

As I mentioned, I am looking forward to Cisco for providing AI-assisted defenses because nowadays there is a lot of AI-assisted attacks. Traditional or even next-generation firewalls would not go a long way as far as defense is concerned, and I think every other vendor such as Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Sophos are working on improving the firewall with respect to AI-assisted attacks, which is what I expect from Cisco as well.

Presently, I am looking for AI features. I do not see any other feature because we are already using advanced malware protection and IPS and application visibility, threat intelligence feeds, and AI would probably be a good addition to the portfolio.

I have been dealing with Cisco Secure Firewall for quite some time.

I am satisfied with Cisco Secure Firewall in our organization.

As the organization grows year by year, I believe it is scaling very well concerning the growth of the organization, the number of branches, the number of users increasing, and the applications scaling out. It is scaling out as per the requirement.

I would rate the technical support by Cisco as eight or nine.

I included Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls in our RFP process before opting for Cisco, but I believe for data center firewalling, Cisco is best suited amongst its competitors.

The deployment was very seamless because we have our own team in the bank for deployment, and we also took professional services when we deployed Cisco Secure Firewall. I do not think that we faced any challenges or hiccups during the deployment.

We have a team of ten to twelve people, but they are not only looking after Cisco Secure Firewall; they are looking at the security posture of the bank, including endpoints and file integrity manager, and MDR. I think two people would be the right, appropriate number looking after Cisco Secure Firewall.

The price is reasonable and it is competitive and affordable. It is from Cisco's authorized partners in Pakistan.

The deployment was very seamless because we have our own team in the bank for deployment, and we also took professional services when we deployed Cisco Secure Firewall. I do not think that we faced any challenges or hiccups during the deployment.

Whenever the traffic comes to the server farm and whenever a user accesses the application, we have one hundred twenty-five applications behind Cisco Secure Firewall, and it is almost all the bank which is using Cisco Secure Firewall. If I can give an exact number, probably we have thirty-one thousand employees in the bank, and all their applications are hosted behind Cisco Secure Firewall. I rate this product nine out of ten.