Cisco Secure IPS (formerly Firepower Next-Generation Intrusion Prevention System, or NGIPS) is an intrusion detection response system that produces security data and enhances the analysis by InsightOps. The technology replaces the former Sourcefire 3D IPS. Cisco acquired Sourcefire in 2013.
N/A
Juniper SRX Series Firewalls
Score 7.4 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.
We were using the Suricate IDS but it is very difficult to configure and manage so we replace it with Cisco Secure IPS. It gives us all the advanced security features and more control over our network.
Cisco Secure IPS is our first product. We were not using any other tools before. We are very happy with the Cisco Secure IPS features and customer support.
Cisco Firepower is as well positioned in the Gartner magic quadrant as the others I mentioned and not just because of that, but the product is really good, delivers what it's intended to deliver. For us, the main strategy is to simplify administration and operation and as we're …
Sourcefire 3D is Snort on steroids. Snort is a great free open source tool but Sourcefire adds a lot of functionality on top of the Snort engine. It opens a whole new world when it comes to detecting and blocking malicious traffic if you decide to place it inline. We needed to …
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 …
Equipment prices ran about the same. Performance and management were also more or less equal. The biggest deciding factors for going with Juniper were (1) fewer security incidents related to SRX firewalls and (2) technical support costs were significantly less.
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.
For scenarios, I described before, like when you have centralized administration and several locations, and the majority of those locations have the same size/requirements, Firepower is well suited. Easy to maintain, relatively cheap to buy. For scenarios too small, like small sales offices like ours, I don't think Firepower could fit, basically because you'll need to invest a certain amount of money to buy, license and deploy.
Juniper vSRX is an excellent edge gateway device. The combination of Tunneling protocols supported and the advanced routing & security features makes it perfect for this kind of deployment. It is available in physical, virtual appliances as well as support on multiple clouds so you can have the same box be your edge gateway in multiple environments for consistency.
It can also work as a Internet Gateway, DMZ Firewall/Router and it would function just fine.
While it can also work as a DC firewall (North-South), the poor GUI will make it harder in the day to day administration for the multiple policies in a DC.
We didn't have any major issues that let us need support. Only, for this reason, I think Cisco Firepower deserves the rating. Even for small issues, the partner that helped us during the project could solve it quickly. There are also tons of documents and other online resources to help maintain, administer and support the product.
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.
We were using the Suricate IDS but it is very difficult to configure and manage so we replace it with Cisco Secure IPS. It gives us all the advanced security features and more control over our network.
Equipment prices ran about the same. Performance and management were also more or less equal. The biggest deciding factors for going with Juniper were (1) fewer security incidents related to SRX firewalls and (2) technical support costs were significantly less.
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.