Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software vs. Sophos NAC Advanced (discontinued)

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

Sophos Network Access Control would be most effective in an enterprise environment where there are many different groups of users, including guest users because it has the ability to block unauthorized users and control the access of guest users. It would not be well suited for an environment with less than 1000 users because as far as I know, the license requires at least that many users.

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

• Provides enforcement of security policies for Windows PCs
• As part of the Sophos Security Suite provides outstanding protection from viruses
• Uses a very nice web-based GUI

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

• Customer support was basically non-existent during the time we needed it the most. This should be #1 priority for any company.
• Lack of support for Linux servers and Mac OS
• The reporting system relies on information provided by the agents
• Wide scale removal process needs some vast improvements. When using a batch removal script, it wrecks the NIC drivers to the point that they have to be removed and reinstalled.

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

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

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

I have used Mcafee Antivirus Suite, Trend Micro, and Vipre Antivirus. I actually had more experience with Vipre than anything else so that is the one that I will be comparing it too. From what I remember, Vipre was more expensive but had better customer support. Other than that, they both do pretty much thing as well as what all the others do. I personally do not believe that any enterprise level antivirus solution is better than any other, it boils down to which one can your company afford, and which one fits best with your needs.

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

• Positive -- We were able to control guest users access
• Positive -- Using the entire Sophos Security Suite I only remember one major virus while I was with the company which saves on downtime, and IT man hours
• Negative -- The time we spent removing this, and reinstalling NIC drivers because the removal process crashed them cost the company in IT man hours.

Incentivized