Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued) vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Cisco IPS Sensors have reached EOL, and EOS.N/A
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Traps replaces traditional antivirus with multi-method prevention, a proprietary combination of malware and exploit prevention methods that protect users and endpoints from known and unknown threats.N/A
Pricing
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Small Businesses
AlienVault USM
AlienVault USM
Score 8.0 out of 10
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
CrowdStrike Falcon
CrowdStrike Falcon
Score 9.1 out of 10
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
CrowdStrike Falcon
CrowdStrike Falcon
Score 9.1 out of 10
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(1 ratings)
8.8
(12 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
2.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco IPS Sensor (Discontinued)Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
IPS sensors are more suited for companies that do not have visibility into their network with third-party analyzing tools. Scenarios would be to place IPS sensors at the perimeter firewalls mainly. IPS sensors are less appropriate for companies that have third-party analyzing tools that will mitigate vulnerabilities and malicious traffic and activities already.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Malware that doesn’t leave files behind has become widely available. Anyone who can afford to reverse this trend should purchase technology. Application whitelisting isn’t for everyone, and Palo Alto Networks Traps can help. Enterprises looking for a low-affected, next-generation solution with high protection should consider it. PAN Traps is a great product at a reasonable price, and I highly recommend it.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • Identifies and blocks malicious traffic.
  • Detects unwanted traffic and allows your company to be proactive, let alone reactive.
  • Comprehensive Threat protection allows companies to adjust thresholds and policies at will.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Direct Access to devices via Live Terminal which provides operations with scripting, triage, and preservation of artifacts.
  • Behavioral Indicators of Compromise which provides alerts on events regarding groups of hosts and their signatures.
  • Querying complex data sets involving a variety of devices for network connections, hashes, DNS, etc.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • The web GUI is somewhat slow.
  • Sometimes difficult to adjust policies.
  • Fail open feature may not work properly all the time.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Traps doesn't seem to function as a traditional A/V very well, so it's better as another layer to your endpoint protection
  • Traps can cause issues with some legacy or custom programs, so exceptions may have to be made
  • Traps falsely identifies things as malicious at times, this is not often though
Read full review
Usability
Cisco
No answers on this topic
Palo Alto Networks
Day to day, Cortex is easy to use when you have no alerts and when an agent upgrade doesn't go south. Alerts are far too "clicky", there's too many steps to drilling down to what actually happened to trigger an alert. Investigating alerts in Cortex takes about 5x longer than it should.
Read full review
Support Rating
Cisco
Cisco TAC has been great at helping with configurations and issues that may arise
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
The support we receive from Palo Alto is one of the best aspects of Traps. It is very easy to recommend their support. It seems much easier to connect directly with someone with a deep understanding of the product rather than other companies where you basically have to make an airtight case that it is some kind of non-standard issue that can't be solved with existing documentation. Palo Alto digs deep and helps with advanced troubleshooting to get things working.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
IPS sensors provides the necessary network visibility my company needs to satisfy its security appetite. By doing so, we have been able to stay compliant and up to date with today's network security requirements and procedures. We are able to be proactive with vulnerabilities and reactive to malicious traffic and intrusions in our day to day operations.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Traps is the slickest interface, easy to use and intuitive rule making, and the rest just didn't quite stack up to the performance level of Traps. McAfee and Kaspersky just hog processor and RAM power. I didn't like the interface and functionality of SentinelOne as much as Traps. Palo Alto really put a lot of time into the development of this software, and had some of the founding fathers of IT Security heading the development process. Can't beat that.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Provided less need to purchase third party analyzing tools.
  • Needed more dedicated staff to build/review/and maintain policies and such.
  • Answers companies need for network security.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • After putting Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR on a user's system, users came back with a positive response that there are no performance issues now.
  • We are able to track and control granular suspicious and malicious activities.
  • Web controls are missing, which if they would have been there would have been very helpful.
Read full review
ScreenShots