Avast Secure Internet Gateway (SIG) vs. Cisco Firepower 4100 Series

The scenario that Avast is great would be for large companies, where it works through homeoffice. Avast would be a bad idea for the educational institution, that is, a place where it will be directed to an underage audience, but I believe that Avast is on its way to becoming a global use system, so in the future it can be used in scenarios.

Incentivized

When we are asked by local partners which security equipment we use we always recommend our Cisco security products. The Firepower firewall is no exception and we can easily recommend this to others who need a fast, secure, and well built system that integrates well with all your existing hardware and software.

Incentivized

• ‘Designer’ of the site is great
• Access places
• The easiness to follow each demand

Incentivized

• Policy management in the GUI. I'm old-school, and still create ACLs in the CLI, but using the GUI for this is very nice.
• Event monitoring and reporting is great, and you can get very granular when it comes to what information you are viewing.
• I really like the troubleshooting features that are built in, especially the packet tracer and the ability to generate and download a troubleshooting package to review or send to TAC.

• Should be able to leave in only 1 language
• Make Avast more communicative
• It has the possibility of leaving it our way

Incentivized

• When deployed as Firepower Threat Defense, configurations cannot be made within the device itself.
• Troubleshooting can be difficult if the Cisco Firepower 4100 Series firewall is managed by the Cisco Firepower Management Center.
• There are two operating systems in Cisco Firepower 4100 Series, firmware upgrade process will take a long time.

In my institution we didn't choose Avast, as they see the best for the team, that is, in this case I didn't have access to the other Avast. But in this case, I can pass on my experience with the Avast that I use. It is great, but it is necessary to improve in several aspects, such as the structure.

Incentivized

As I mentioned before, the Fortigates have better failover. I think the Cisco interface is easier to use that that of the FortiGate. My only criticism would be that with multiple CLIs, it can get a bit confusing when you are trying to configure something or troubleshoot from the CLI.

• Great for team communication
• Great for improving our understanding of the product.
• Terrible in language setting

Incentivized

• Positive impact would be our increased security network wide.
• Another positive would be the increased processing power, saving us time and [from] needing more equipment.
• A negative impact would be the increased need for having to learn a new interface.

Incentivized