Enso vs. FireMon

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Enso
Score 0.0 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
FireMon
Score 7.9 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
FireMon is a real-time security policy management solution built for today’s complex multi-vendor, enterprise environments. Supporting the latest firewall and policy enforcement technologies spanning on-premises networks to the cloud, FireMon delivers visibility and control across the entire IT landscape to automate policy changes, meet compliance standards, to minimize policy-related risk. Since creating their policy management solution in 2004, FireMon states they've helped…N/A
Pricing
EnsoFireMon
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
EnsoFireMon
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
EnsoFireMon
Considered Both Products
Enso

No answer on this topic

FireMon
Chose FireMon
FireMon gives us more flexibility when deploying the solution. Integrates with cutting-edge security solutions
Chose FireMon
We have only used firemon and there hasn't been a need to consider other products as we are satisfied with what Firemon can do.
Chose FireMon
Firewall Rule analyzer was used before I joined the company, but I have no experience with it.
Chose FireMon
OSSEC is open source and FM is much better from GUI and supportability stand points. Tufin and FireMon are very comparable
Chose FireMon
Best Compliance and Auditing tool to to identify the traffic that is hitting this rule.
Chose FireMon
I was not involved on the decision but having multiple brands in the company make sense to use a tool such as Firemon because it integrates easily with multiple vendors.
Chose FireMon
Infoblox DDI (BloxOne), Palo Alto Networks Prisma Cloud, Palo Alto Panorama, Palo Alto Networks Threat Protection, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series and Fortinet FortiGate
Chose FireMon
Algosec and Tufin both are good tools but the cost involved for what they offer as services led us to go with Firemon.
Chose FireMon
i was not involved in the selection however i am quite happy with FireMon as the replacement of our aging product.
Chose FireMon
We have stuck with FireMon, and there is no reason to leave.
Chose FireMon
The Dell product ran on its own hardware, which failed often. The reports were not available to us in real-time, we had to request them. Many false detections of issues.
Chose FireMon
Both perform admirably with regards to providing that single pane of glass and visibility in a normalized view. They both provide great insight into where your organization stands in terms of compliance controls. In terms of upgrading and scalability, I would have to give the …
Chose FireMon
I has worked with Algosec and while they are very similar product, I find the FireMon is easier to understand and get rolling with. While both require some learning, FireMon is by far the easier one. Once you have an understanding of how things are arranged and labeled you can …
Chose FireMon
FireMon has the most supported devices.
The UI is easy to use and intuitive.
There is a comprehensive list of built in compliance controls that are missing in the competition.
Chose FireMon
To be blunt, at the time of purchase most of these products appeared to do the same things in the same ways. What really brought us to the table with FireMon six years ago was their willingness to earn our business, and to this day they remain just as committed to keeping our …
Chose FireMon
FireMon is way more flexible and the interface is tremendously better than any existing ones.
Chose FireMon
Algosec is a great tool, lower in cost as well.

FireMon has alot of capabilites, but our organization is not ready or have a use case yet for those features.
Chose FireMon
Tufin works much better with CheckPoint.
Chose FireMon
They are two very well done tools, FireMon is better suited for firewall rules evaluation, configuration and review, Tenable.io is better suited for CIS benchmarking. We ended up using both of them in the end, it really depends of your needs and what you are looking for, the …
Chose FireMon
Nothing like FireMon. We have other tools but 99% of them are looking at specific areas and not the enterprise security on a dashboard.
Chose FireMon
We performed a head-to-head PoC between FireMon and AlgoSec several years ago. Both platforms were well developed, but FireMon had the upper hand in three areas:
  1. Its UI was more unified and intuitive across the different components and products
  2. The reporting was better suited …
Chose FireMon
AlgoSec and Tufin both have initial issues during the POC stage, and FireMon even though with the changes they have made still works better and is more user friendly.
Best Alternatives
EnsoFireMon
Small Businesses
Armor
Armor
Score 6.0 out of 10
NinjaOne
NinjaOne
Score 9.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Druva Security Cloud
Druva Security Cloud
Score 9.4 out of 10
Cisco Meraki MX
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
Druva Security Cloud
Druva Security Cloud
Score 9.4 out of 10
Cisco Meraki MX
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
EnsoFireMon
Likelihood to Recommend
-
(0 ratings)
7.9
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
6.8
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.7
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
7.9
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
EnsoFireMon
Likelihood to Recommend
No answers on this topic
FireMon is best used in a large environment (for example, I have >100
firewalls in my environment). It's best used when trying to improve
security posture and showing changes in firewall security over time. It
might not be the best choice for smaller environments or those that aren't concerned about security management.
Read full review
Pros
No answers on this topic
  • PCI Reporting - After identifying which firewalls and rulesets are in scope, producing a report artifact to satisfy PCI requirements on Firewall reviews is literally a two-click operation.
  • Storing Rule Metadata - FireMon stores metadata (prefilled fields, standard fields, and custom fields) for each rule in each policy which is valuable for context during firewall reviews in particular
  • API - FireMon exposes most if not all of its functionality via REST API
Read full review
Cons
No answers on this topic
  • Some features could be added to the existing functionality which include NAT rules usage
  • Rule expiration normalization from firewalls rather than entering them in rule documentation
  • .csv exports of the files from the firewall pane only gives usage for 30 days by default and that should be increased
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
Once all the customization has been completed, the business is starting to see the return on investment. The visibility it provides into the network gear that is owned by other IT groups is immeasurable and has allowed us to apply standards across the board. The only thing I have concern with is their support documentation.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
It save me time and I'm able to have the review - review the rule independently with using my time.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
FireMon has been relatively stable overall. However, there have been a handful of times where we had issues with the console. For example, we couldn't update which devices to include in a security assessment. The initial suggestion from support was to just reboot it. It seems like there weren't many other options available such as to restart services before going to the extreme of a complete reboot.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
I'm not sure we have the largest implementation of FireMon out there but we do have a few 1000 devices being probed by FireMon. Overall, the system's performance has been rock solid. The console refreshes quickly and reports are generated within an expected timeframe.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
FireMon technical support is awesome! They respond quickly to our requests and they are well trained and very knowledgeable about the tool. Some issues have to be referred to the development team, but technical support largely provides solutions for any issues that we may have.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
Implementation is fairly simple. Most issues can be resolved by referencing manuals.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
No answers on this topic
I has worked with AlgoSec and while they are very similar product, I find the FireMon is easier to understand and get rolling with. While both require some learning, FireMon is by far the easier one. Once you have an understanding of how things are arranged and labeled you can easily import firewalls and begin to work on them to improve them
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
Firemon Is easily scalable and maintainable with any size team. Although it requires some tech debt, it is well worth the time to invest to ensure compliance is visible and reports are accurate. Although our environment is very large we do not fully utilize the scalability of the Firemon product.
Read full review
Return on Investment
No answers on this topic
  • It helps us save us time in determining what change was made and by whom.
  • Real time alerting is a great convenience in helping us know if something went wrong, we can immediately review the last report to determine what has changed.
  • Allows us to determine what rules are not used and if said rules are still required.
Read full review
ScreenShots