Cisco Firepower 4100 Series vs. SonicWall TZ

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

Based on my experience, this is a solid platform for a small to mid sized company, especially when there is someone who has IT experience, or can get outsourced IT help. I would not recommend for someone who is a technology novice. Also, this is a competent device for someone who is looking to add VPN services for remote workers.

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.

• If you have multiple sites and you want the connect the sites through secure medium this is best firewall for you.
• There are very advanced features helps you to connect the device easily and securely.
• Easy to connect the sites through advanced routing protocols.

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.

• management is confusing has many items that could be improved to facilitate the work to the network administrator
• in the diagnostic tool I would improve the response times, that is, if a ping test is required, it should be quick, since in cases of failures it is sought to minimize the impact as much as possible.
• each function has a different license item, I would place a single license package for all team functions

I have used the SonicWall TZ 350 for years and I can say that it is an excellent and complete firewall. It is easy to configure and administer because it has a friendly interface. It is safe, it offers several types of security features, VPN, and also protection against malware. Support and warranty also recommended. It's fast and the problem was solved in less than 1 day.

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.

SonicWall and WatchGuard are both fine appliances, but I am accustomed to the Barracuda NG. The Barracuda Control Center is so powerful and useful that it beats out the other two. SonicWall does a great job of dividing up firewall rules and NAT policies, but this is a preference among engineers.

• 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

• VPN access allowed employees to be more flexible and being able to get internal resources from anywhere.
• Lower licensing price compared to competitors saved some money.
• Protecting from unnecessary connections increased performance and uptime.
• One of the firmware versions caused CPU performance degradation that slowed down the Internet speed which caused issues in the call center.

Incentivized