Cisco Firepower 4100 Series vs. Comodo Firewall

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

In an enterprise, where there is a threshold of many new users with whom there is a need to share the internet, Comodo Firewall can really ease the burden. Security of network and infrastructure increases with less cost compared to other alternatives. Allows advanced users to create advanced scenarios and deal with them.

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.

• Beginner friendly UI
• Extensibility for pro users
• Very low on system resources

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.

• Provide package for Linux systems as well.
• Pricing is still not friendly for casual users.
• Allow API integration with web application.

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.

Although AWS WAF is really nice and convenient, it only runs on a web application level, no doubt it has no match in that particular segment, and it is prone to vendor locking. Comodo on the other hand provides better service on the system and network level. if you have to choose a better UI, Comodo is the best solution

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

• For enterprise level company, it has really great ROI.
• Not perfect fit for individual use or for small company.
• We streamlined the process of managing network security.

Incentivized