Check Point 4000 Appliances vs. F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM)

Well suited for small to medium business with less than 1000 users. Good edge device, NAT is easy to work with. The anti-malware, anti-spyware are worthwhile paid add-ons. Anti-spoofing is built in, and required to be put in. The split of management between Gaia and secure platform applications is painful, but nothing that can't be gotten around.

Incentivized

We were able to eliminate a firewall from our network architecture by integrating the module into our existing F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM). This allowed us to save on tech refresh costs, since the F5 was able to handle the module without much additional strain on the device. However, if a firewall had features that the AFM lacked, then using that firewall in tandem with an F5 would be preferable.

Incentivized

• If you have critical data then you can use this firewall for secure your organization
• You can also use for cloud security
• If you want the deep packet inspection then this is one of the best firewall for you.

• Load balancing using pools
• SSL offloading
• iRules for threat handling

Incentivized

• Steep learning curve for admins
• No packet tracer application like the ASA to test flows prior to putting in new rules, etc.
• Policy packages are all or nothing. I cannot uninstall or turn off a piece of the overall policy, it's all or nothing.

Incentivized

• If unsure, can be overly cautious.
• There are few changes the end user can make.

Incentivized

F5 Advanced Firewall Manager has been a solid, strong solution to both keep our systems safe and being seamless for our end users. Most of the time, the end-user is not impacted and does not even know F5 Advanced Firewall Manager is running which is exactly what we are looking for.

Incentivized

We were using the Cisco ASA 5525 but this firewall was not fully secure. Lots of advanced features were missing so we installed the Check Point 4000 Appliances and we are really happy with the features, advanced IPS and web filtering help us to protect our organization and also more control our user traffic.

Both F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager] and Radware require training as they are not easy to use. But Radware uses some configuration that needs deep learning and proper labs. From an admin's perspective, Configuration and management for F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager are] less. Also, the cost of implementing F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager] is lesser than that of Radware Alteon.

Incentivized

• We have not seen a zero-day exploit since implementing the anti-spyware, anti-malware, and URL filtering functionality
• We have not seen a successful intrusion into our systems since the implementation of our checkpoint 4000
• We have had this firewall for 5+ years, and it still has much life left in it.

Incentivized

• When we had to decide on whether to buy different hardware our team were all in support of renewal for F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager]
• F5 [BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager] requires proper training on tools and clear concepts of packets, headers, and content to create WAF policies
• Overall, we are satisfied by the ROI provided by our F5 AFM and GTMs

Incentivized