Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) software is the core OS for the ASA suite. It provides firewall functionality, as well as integration with context-specific Cisco security modules. It is scaled for enterprise-level traffic and connections.
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX Firewalls is a combined UTM and Software-Defined WAN solution. Meraki is managed via the cloud, and provides core firewall services, including site-to-site VPN, plus network monitoring.
$595
per appliance
Juniper SRX
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Juniper SRX is a firewall offering. It provides a variety of modular features, scaled for enterprise-level use, based on a 3-in-1 OS that enables routing, switching, and security in each product.
Integration with Cisco Ecosystem, Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software integrates smoothly with other Cisco security products and networking solutions. We have already invested in Cisco networking equipment and infrastructure which is why we chose Cisco Adaptive …
Cisco ASA is doing well, has [a] lot of documents available, [and easy] implementation, however, other vendors are also very easy to deploy. Cisco ASA has [a] great support team. Cisco ASA is truly [a] next-generation product. Now it is cloud-managed, along with zero-touch …
This was selected due to our organization standard and our branch office is using ASA. Integration with the same product is really a good option with ASA.
Configuration and management of Cisco's ASA are straightforward. We chose Cisco ASA for many reasons, as well as Cisco's threat response reports. We previously had issues with Sophos UTM due to its poor performance. We no longer have to be concerned about performance issues …
Our Palo Altos and Cisco ASAs are pretty comparable. They both seem to work well when used in an HA pair. They can both do IP/Port based ACLs. But the Palos also have APP-ID which helps to make sure that the traffic passing through your firewall is the type of traffic …
Above all, the robustness and quality of the components, the support and the rapid resolution of warranty issues. Cisco is a serious company and demonstrates this by making the processes with the client as easy as possible.
The Cisco ASA 5500 Series comes with high-performance security services which include firewall and anti-virus, anti-phishing, anti-spam and web filtering services.Cisco ASA Software delivers enterprise-class security capabilities for the ASA. Introduced new FirePower NGIPS …
Cisco Meraki MX Firewalls were definitely more expensive that the Juniper SRX models we had previously but the easy of use, configuration, consistency and insight the Meraki dashboard provides made it an easy choice to use the better produce, Meraki.
It’s very similar to Cisco ASA but there are differences in use, first and most important for me is the way you control and manage your network through Meraki Dashboard and online. You can do it in your home without a VPN. The second is that clients like banks and financial …
We compared VeloCloud. The product seemed fine. Outside circumstances made us not use VeloCloud. We are currently evaluating FortiGate and FortiAP for specific and unique locations along with Sophos SG Firewall and AP. Although we plan to add a competitor we are not planning on …
Depends on the use case. Meraki shines in the area of ease of management and ease of deployment. This is typically retail customers with many locations or customers with lean IT staff. Meraki MX seems not to do well in complex environments with heavy IT staff requirements. …
I have evaluated other products such as FortiGate and sophos brands but the administration is more difficult, more experience is required to make any implementation or configuration change.
Meraki MX helped me save time in configuration and it is easier to use and manage, it's simple and fast. I love it.
Verified User
Manager
Chose Cisco Meraki MX
I've used traditional ASAs with and without firepower, newer firepower only Cisco firewalls, and Fortinet FortiGate firewalls. I think Meraki stacks up pretty well to them with most features. I think managing the Meraki is much easier than all of them because of the …
We also have an ASA for VPN traffic and it works great, but it takes time and consulting to set-up if you are not a Cisco engineer. You can set-up any Meraki system in minutes with a decent networking background, which is great for most users!
We chose the Meraki MX Firewall for its ease of use and advanced security features. The decision was not difficult when judging how easy it would be for the other IT team members to make configuration changes. After evaluating the advanced security we found it could cut back on …
I prefer Cisco ASA for large enterprise deployments. Fortigate works well but I'm not a huge fan of their GUI interface (maybe personal preference). Sonicwall and Watchguard are avoided and only used when we inherit the …
Like I've mentioned before, the MX was much easier to setup, and we were willing to sacrifice advanced features offered by the ASAs to favor the quicker diagnostics the dashboard has to offer.
We've been a Cisco shop for a long time. Had we not been introduced to Meraki, we probably would have implemented more Cisco gear. And as it happened, Cisco bought Meraki just after we started deploying them. So it was a win for us. As for how they compare, performance-wise …
Juniper SRX stands tall compared to all these products for Large Service Provider Networks, where traffic volume is larger. Also, cost comparison with SRX's few other products can also be another contributing factor while selecting this. As well as Juniper Routers, Switches, …
The comparison between the different firewalls is really down to preference and price at this point. The SRX is a solid device, and we have not seen a hardware failure to date. The Juniper support I have had is stellar and has helped me out with larger more complex scenario …
Juniper SRX is significantly better in every category.
Cisco ASA was terrible. The config is unintuitive and not easy to manage. Cisco left the ASA abandoned from any kind of meaningful software updates for around a decade.
I love the Cisco ASA but I've become used to the SRX. I am a CLI kind of guy so the SRX works for me. Others may be more GUI based so the ASA may be more comfortable to you. If that's the case then the ASA's ASDM is a solid platform to manage your FW. Junos hasn't gotten this …
The SRX Stacks up well to the ASA and Sonic wall but I feel the features provided by FortiGate/Palo Alto and Checkpoint far exceed that of the competitors.
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.
The Meraki MX lineup is well suited for organizations that need centralized management of multiple locations, as it allows for both quick deployment and simple/easy remote administration all from a single pane of glass. It also works very well for providing VPN access for remote workers and helps monitor end-device uptime. It does, however, fall a bit short in its firewall's customization, compared to traditional appliances (like our WatchGuard Firebox), so perhaps less suited for organizations that need more customization, as the Meraki MX lineup is primarily designed for simplicity and straightforward cloud-based management.
SRXs seem to be well suited at the enterprise level for plain routers, firewalls, and IDP/IDS. They work well on MPLS and Ethernet, including Internet. I have 3 SRXs also performing edge duty, with 2 in a high availability (HA) cluster. The Juniper line of SRXs provides a good range of scaling from small business to extremely large enterprise. Wire speed is a common comparison factor and Juniper shines in that area.
The Cisco Meraki MX series is phenomenal at allowing us to remotely manage networks. So the devices usually act as the brain behind our client's networks, which makes it really, really easy for our team to take a look at what's going on in those client network environments, resolve any issues, and make sure that our client's networks are staying secure.
Layer seven firewall rules. Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
My only real criticism of the product is that it's hard to figure out how to upgrade the firmware from the CLI via TFTP via the docs, but it works great once you get it sorted.
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
The simplicity and ease of use for the Meraki Dashboard make it an easy choice for our organization to renew our Meraki Enterprise Agreement. We will likely continue using the Meraki MC67-C, MX450, and other MX models in their catalog until we shift away from Meraki completely
Some features simply aren't there, but the ones that are there are pretty easy to use. Sometimes it is easy to get lost when trying to find the specific device you want to work on, but that's mostly due to how rarely we have to go into the interface.
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.
Meraki MX devices support high availability (HA) configurations, which ensures minimal downtime if one device goes offline. This feature has helped us maintain a stable and reliable network, even in cases of hardware failures. ince Meraki is cloud-managed, we've noticed that the cloud infrastructure is generally highly reliable, with minimal service interruptions or downtime. This makes it easier to manage the network remotely without significant availability concerns. Meraki automatically pushes firmware updates and patches, which helps maintain system stability without requiring manual intervention. These updates are rolled out in a manner that ensures minimal disruption to service.
The interface is pretty responsive. The lower end devices are easy to overwhelm if you have a lot of throughput. Be sure the model you get is rated for the amount of traffic you will have. Overbuild if possible, otherwise you won't be fully leveraging the connection from your ISP.
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.
I haven't ever had a bad experience with Meraki support. On the few occasions where I wasn't understanding the UI or needed some clarification about what a setting actually would do, I contacted them and they were very quickly able to provide help. Returns are simple and fast, too. We had to return a defective device one time and they shipped the replacement before we had even un-racked the one that was faulty. Unlike many other vendors, they didn't ask use to a do long list of scripted diagnostics, they just took my word for it that the device was broken and sent out a replacement immediately
This is the one area where I have a beef with Juniper. When I called into Cisco TAC, 90% of the time, the first person I spoke with was able to resolve my issue. With Juniper TAC, 90% of the time, the first person I speak with is not able to resolve my issue, seems to almost be reading from a script, and must escalate my ticket. All of which takes time.
great when they offered it, really tested your knowledge with hands on and see what your peers from other orgs know. glad to see that we were ahead of the curve of what our peers knew
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
Implementing Meraki MX devices in phases—starting with a pilot group or select branch offices—was invaluable. This allowed us to identify potential configuration issues, troubleshoot problems, and refine our setup before rolling it out company-wide. It also helped to get feedback from early users and adjust the deployment strategy accordingly. The SD-WAN capabilities in Meraki MX were essential for optimizing our WAN traffic and ensuring better application performance across various locations.
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.
Cisco Meraki MX provides simplicity and scalability while cutting costs. With Meraki MX, you get a Security appliance, router, and Firewall in one appliance and managed with one GUI. These features enable the network engineers to maintain large-scale enterprises with a single dashboard from a remote site or anywhere with internet, all thanks to the Meraki cloud dashboard
Juniper SRX stands tall compared to all these products for Large Service Provider Networks, where traffic volume is larger. Also, cost comparison with SRX's few other products can also be another contributing factor while selecting this. As well as Juniper Routers, Switches, and multiple products from the same vendor to maintain one single vendor environment. As well as Juniper Support is also really good.
When I first started with my company we had various infrastructure and a mix of tech. Since going to Cisco Meraki MX we have noticed better network performance and our new sites are much easier to bring online. Users have noticed an improvement in VPN connection and getting into all our systems.
From a positive impact? Basically it allows us to set up shop very quickly. It allowed us to add sites to our network very quickly. From a negative perspective, I think the only thing is that I can see from a negative perspective is I have a preference to working with ACLI in terms of how I engage with the youth tool At the moment, the only way to actually engage with a tool is on a gui and sometimes what I'd actually like is more detailed information in terms of actual configuration that you'll actually get out of ACLI.
It is a workhorse for our field operations. It provides the last touch for an ISP to the customer. The customer has no view of the device, but with the repeatability of the device, they do not need to.
The ability to roll out a dynamic routing protocol attached to a security zone allows elasticity to the environment that supports growth.
VLAN support on the inside interfaces allow this to be the only device in some smaller deployments we install these in.