Check Point Quantum Security Gateway Next Generation Firewall vs. Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software

1) For huge DC environments and complex networks 2) Where clients were consistent up-time like FSI and healthcare 3) Application-aware client req. and preventing day 0 cyber attacks. 4) Securing East-West traffic, hyper-scaling capabilities 5)Some advantages - Best Security meets Ultimate Hardware and SandBlast Zero Day Protection out of the box, Modular hardware 6) High Performance CPUs

Incentivized

Cisco ASA's are great for internal network connected access between a firewall and the central management server. And, for complex networks where high security requirements with overly strict compliance are necessary. For networks with limited connectivity to the core or for poor network connectivity these are not the best solution. There are other more stand-alone firewall's that do this better. These firewall's are a little more complex to set up to start with so significant knowledge of these devices is required to set them up and ensure they are best practice installed.

Incentivized

• SSL inspection provides more effective mitigation of threat and data leakage with the ability to inspect and analyze encrypted traffic.
• Threat emulation and extraction provides protection against zero-day threats without compromising the data of infected files.
• 'Office mode' VPN provides a seamless connected experience for remotely connected individuals.
• Application control features provide granular restrictions to the type of application traffic than can pass through the network.

Incentivized

• ASA is our VPN concentrator. The client and server are very stable and very easy to use
• ASA also offers Intrusion Prevention, to an extent. This is also very useful for an improved security posture for a small company
• ASA allowed us to scale very quickly. We could onboard clients, partners, and consultants and give them a great onboarding experience as well
• Administrative costs with ASA are low. It's very easy to administer.

Incentivized

• HTTPS Inspection -- The firewall has troubles re-packaging the packet in a way that some websites are able to interpret correctly
• Support -- Even getting support directly from Check Point isn't the easiest of experiences. They are more concerned about how fast they can close a ticket out, rather than fixing the problem.
• Custom reports -- Custom reporting is extremely limited

Incentivized

• The ASDM software is at times a nightmare to install because of different java versions[.]
• [The firewall] could do with a power button, just to be able to do a hard reboot when needed[.]
• It would be nice to manage the firewall via the web on port 443[.]

Incentivized

To be honest there has been now great products out in the market compared to Cisco ASA. I beleieve Cisco has to do a lot of improvement in this area. The other defeiniete factors is the cost when it comes to renewals which is always a premium on Cisco products

Incentivized

I generally have not noticed the outages, however since it's a machine it can malfunction, we need to implement the firewall infrastructure in such a way that it is highly available with device failure, region failure etc. Else any solution will be having the issues if they are not build with resiliency.

Incentivized

Check Point has a variety of support options that can be used to optimize your investment in the product. Companies with a larger information security and certified checkpoint engineer employee base can benefit from a standard SLA, while companies with a smaller security engineering footprint or more critical implementations can opt for premium, elite or diamond packages that even include the ability to provide on-site engineers for major security incidents. Check Point PRO support also provides the ability to outsource maintenance concerns by automating case creation and follow up when application components fail.

Incentivized

The support is usually very good and gets back to you very quickly. However I had some instances of when two engineers will give me wildly different answers to what I thought was a simple question. Overall however I do rate the support highly and they are generally always very good.

Incentivized

It was quite a good one, how ever requires an expertise to deploy hence the SMB segment would be finding it difficult to implement this product. The one good reason is that there are lot of ASA certified engineers in compared to the other certified engineers. Hence this resembles positively on the deployment as you have quite a lot of experienced engineer on your deployment

Incentivized

In a heterogeneous environment, we wanted to keep multiple vendors for multiple purposes. CP was found very good in handling basic Next generation firewalls features along with handling of VPNs.

Incentivized

We were using [pfSense] before in our environment but we regularly facing difficulties over it due to software bugs & downtime. After implementing Cisco ASA, it resolved our availability issue & provides us a reliable solution with the best security features & easy to understand GUI.

Incentivized

• Although there are better alternatives out there, Check Point delivers results for the price we paid for the system.
• Since implementation, we have not have any major issues with the product, minor issues were resolved in a timely fashion.
• Check Point currently fulfills our need for an outside facing firewall, when our organization grows larger, we will be looking at higher level enterprise solutions.

Incentivized

• Most network engineers have worked with ASA, so there is no need for re-training when adding or turning over staff
• Current configs from older devices plug in easily, and are operational on larger devices if an upgrade is required
• Many support options available

Incentivized