AlgoSec Reviews

We are security consultants based in India. We provide solutions to our customers and implement for them. We deploy AlgoSec on cloud and on-premise, depending on the customer. The use case is generally for companies that have multiple firewall vendors. If you have FireEye, for example, you can create the rules according to your environment. But if you have four different kinds of firewalls, and you want to allow or block something, you need the configuration on all the firewalls. AlgoSec simplifies that process. Many of our clients in India use this solution. We are official partners of AlgoSec. 

This solution will cut down operating costs in any company. 

It's a bit difficult for a network engineer to login on the firewall and make the changes and in that sense, AlgoSec is a lifesaver. You don't need to log in on each separate firewall, you just login on AlgoSec and make changes on all the firewalls from one single pane of glass. You can get the logs from all the firewalls to your AlgoSec as well. And if you see any blocked traffic, you can delete it at the point it gets blocked. If you have five firewalls, it will show which firewall is getting blocked and that can be automated. It's a very powerful and useful tool that can be customized to your requirements. One of the main features is that you can configure all the rules in one place. It also provides a complete report of Euro firewall rules that complies with security authorities such as GDPR.

If we talk about Cloud and SDN Platforms it support AWS, Azure etc.... 

I'd like to see this solution support some other Cloud platforms as well such as Alibaba and a GCP to give the customer flexibility. 

It's a very reliable and stable product because it's not dependent on any hardware, and is installed on a one-to-one machine. 

Scalability in this case really depends on whether the customer is able to provide the resources or not. It requires resources including memory, RAM, and those sorts of things. From a software point of view, I'd say it is very scalable. 

I haven't needed to access technical support because their documentation was so clean and in such a format that I was able to implement without any issues. My customers use it and they are pretty happy with it, because there is good customer support available in India.

The initial setup is very straightforward. You just find the resources on the virtual machine and download.

Licensing is on an annual basis. The best part is that if you have two or three firewalls, but you are using them in a cluster, it's counted as one. This is a basic aspect of the licensing with AlgoSec. I think the licensing is pretty good because they now have all the compliance issues sorted. 

If any user or customer has firewalls, maybe 15 or 20 plus, definitely go for this product. It cuts down operating costs. The benefit of AlgoSec is that you only need one engineer to do all the configurating, rather than separate engineers for the different firewalls. Not only that but you can automate as well. Obviously you have to integrate a texting management tool, but you can integrate and follow the focus.

I rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

I have been implementing AlgoSec for different end customers. None of the environments are on the cloud, they're on-premise applications. Some of them have been planned, but a majority of them are for virtual instances. I have implemented four or five end-customers and also supported them with AlgoSec.

I deploy and maintain AlgoSec for customers for test purposes. I use it before doing anything on the customer's premises. For testing purposes, I have used it in my own environment also, but the majority of the time I'm using it in the customers' environment.

I have integrated AlgoSec with Check Point, Palo Alto, some older Cisco versions like WSN, Fortinet firewalls, and Cisco ASA.

The features that I like are the monitoring and the alerts. It provides real-time monitoring, or at least close to real-time. I think that is important. I like its way of organizing, also. It is pretty clear. I also like their reporting structure - the way we can use AlgoSec to clear a rule base, like covering and hiding rules. For example, if the customer is concerned about different standards, like ISO or PZI levels, we can all do the same compliance from AlgoSec. We can even track the change monitoring and mitigate their risks with it. You can customize the workflows based on their environment. I find those features interesting in AlgoSec.

The visibility is pretty clear from top to bottom, even interconnected maps and zones.

We can always customize the standard risk profiles. But even within the standard one, before doing any changes, when you go with the flow, they always inform you. Before implementing the change, you get the visibility there. You get the visibility with risks.

This is important because the places that I have worked have different departments for risk handling. So whenever we go through the flows before implementing, that part goes through the risk department and gets their approval first. With AlgoSec you get to know the risk profile before implementing the change. That way you get to know the risks that you are taking with that particular change. So it's important.

It has helped to reduce the time that it takes to implement firewall rules. In some places where I work, they fill a form and send it to a particular manager. For example, if an end-user fills it and he sends it to his manager, then it gets his approval and he sends it to the risk department, and gets their approval, and sends it back to the person who implements. There's a chain that takes a longer period of time and even their paper costs. That gets reduced when they use a workflow from AlgoSec. They always get automatic notifications when the change moves on to the next level so they know exactly which stage the change is in.

It is helping to reduce those policy changes by more than 50%.

You can face audits in two ways. You can either do it from AlgoSec. I have used it like that for periodic audits. You can always plan it. Either you can go from one of your rules, clean up your rule base and improve the standards of your risks and all the other areas in the AlgoSec reports. Or else, you can go for a PCR level report and you can prepare it stage-by-stage and commit up to a certain standard. I have used both methods. You can also do reports for the particular changes and check how much your environment is improved after you follow the report and do the particular change that they suggest. For example, reordering or combining your rules or removing some of the unused objects. Then you can run a report and see how much it gets improved. So in terms of auditing, which they can run every six or eight months, or once in a year, you can always turn on your audit before it comes to that level. You can always prepare for your audit by scheduling reports.

It's pretty easy when it comes to integrating with the leading vendors. If you want to integrate, they have proper documentation. Their documentation is very good. I have to give them credit for that. You can always follow it. Integrations are pretty easy and much easier than with some of the similar competitive products that I have used. I don't want to mention names, but AlgoSec is much easier because of their proper documentation. For example, when you are integrating a particular device or application, you know the things that you need to do because they have the proper documentation before doing it. It takes less time to integrate compared to some of the other products in the field.

I have come up with two cases of misconfigurations in some rules. One of them is with change requests when you have a single object and you just have to amend it to the particular rule but not to other specific rules. The other thing is what rule it's covering. It's not a misconfiguration, actually, and you can amend it. I have come up with some situations like that. Before coming back to my stage, it is always clear from the other risks and level of approval. So I did come up with that kind of a scenario but it's not actually a misconfiguration.

AlgoSec has helped to simplify the job of security engineers because you can always monitor your risks and know that your particular configurations are up-to-date, so it reduces the effort of the security engineers. You can always get top to bottom. For example, if you talk about the rule base of a particular firewall and access to some particular things, you can always get a clean one with the required security. So rather than going here and there, they can always use this tool to do the automation and their decision-making.

I haven't yet configured with Cisco ACI, but in the next one and a half months, I'll be integrating it with an ACI structure.

I expect the value of bringing AlgoSec and ACI together will be good. It'll be like an extension. If you integrate AlgoSec, it's not like a single point. If you connect it with the ACI fabric it will be challenging. I haven't really experienced it in full, because I am still in the designing phase and I haven't done the full implementation, but I feel like it'll be interesting and challenging. Since I have not experienced it or yet done the implementation combining these two, I cannot fully say how it will be. It's a question mark. But I'm expecting it to be a little bit challenging because the visibility differs.

AlgoSec needs improvement with its support level.

I know that they have 3D architecture like SMB and enterprise on top of that. Some people consider this as a noncritical device. But because it's not as critical as a firewall, some people think that the support level does not need to be equal to a firewall level of support. But if some people are monitoring and managing firewalls through AlgoSec, the level of support should be equal to a firewall level. It shouldn't be dragging over two or three days. I know that they have three levels of support, but at the very first level, I believe you should be able to directly contact the tech and get a solution as soon as possible.

The only problem I have with AlgoSec is just its level of support, not with the product. Not with the organization or the documentation or anything else, but if I need any additional support, the only problem is the time it takes to get it.

I've been using AlgoSec for two and a half to almost three years now.

I use AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer and FireFlow.

It is generally stable. As I mentioned, the only problem the customers are worried about is the technical response time from AlgoSec. If you have to contact tech support the project will get delayed. The customers are comparing it because, for example, in their environment they have Palo or Check Point, and their support levels are much higher. With them, when you open a ticket, after a few minutes you can check and get the opinion from the tech or check if an engineer is available. If it's a critical issue, you can always talk to him within hours and fix the issue. So they always compare that level to AlgoSec's support level. That's the only issue that we have to explain to them. The customer's opinion is this is a non-critical device because this is not a firewall. But we manage firewalls so that kind of level of support should be given.

In terms of scalability, the maximum that I have tried with AlgoSec is six clusters. Its scalability is good. The way that we can work with it is good because with every device you can see everything on the same dashboard. If you want to check the monitoring, you can always select the device to see. You can check the status by clicking the device. It's the same structure. The scalability is good but I have only worked with a maximum of six clusters so I can't tell you exactly when it comes to a high number of hours, if it is good or bad, but for the six that I have worked with, it's good.

We do have plans to increase usage of AlgoSec. I have explained to some of the customers about the application integrations, the visibilities, and the rule-based optimizations by using this feature. In terms of features, I am expecting that they'll amend that component to their environment. Since we are a system integrating company, when we propose a solution for a particular customer, we always propose to do firewalls. Therefore, we always add AlgoSec. When we are proposing it, we always submit AlgoSec automatically.

I did not find the initial set up very complex. It's advanced, but not complex. Their documentation for implementation is very good.

It really depends on the customer. Some places, when you go for a POC or a deployment, we can always plan and tell them that if they are integrating these kinds of things, these are the levels of provisions that we need. These are the things that they need to do from their end. 

The POC for some customers goes three or four days because of their delays. But with some customers it goes fairly quickly, like a day and a half or two days. For one customer it took five days because they had a procedure where you have to fill a form and send it before creating your user for AlgoSec when it's with the firewall integrations. Because of that, it took a little bit longer. So depending on that I give it three to five maximum days to integrate four or five clusters. It really shouldn't have taken that long to do the work. Then you need to contact different teams to get the support. It all causes delays.

In terms of implementation strategy, I'm always looking at what their components are. I always have to go with the Firewall Analyzer components and to check what type of devices  they are willing to integrate for this particular unit. I check if it is a Check Point cluster, or the Palo cluster, or a Forti cluster, and what the additional features are that they are looking for. Based on that, I complete the Firewall Analyzer unit as soon as I can. Since I have worked with the product, I have similar use cases. What are the things that we can use to demonstrate for firewall change flow? I'm always asking for input from them. What are the things that you need for base level policy changes, etc...?

In terms of actually deploying AlgoSec, most of the time it's me only. But I have to contact the other end. There is always a direct contact person and a support team when it comes for integrating the firewalls. 

When it comes to maintaining AlgoSec, we have another colleague also. They can always give the support.

I have seen improvements of ROI at companies. Although customers might have a department, they recruit new people to use AlgoSec reports to analyze their risk, monitor the alerts, and check their daily tasks. I have seen new implementaton by a banking customer who obviously see the value.

I'm on the technical side so I don't have a clear picture about pricing and licensing. But as far as I know, if a customer asks for a 24/7 support, the pricing level is much higher, relative to normal 8 - 5 support.

Recently, we proposed AlgoSec and there were other companies who proposed other solutions. During the technical discussions, I was the one who did the demonstration, and we were able to say that whatever features they are looking for, we can always provide it with AlgoSec. When they finally released the tenders we were in the top three options and the second place for technical. The only problem was the pricing with AlgoSec.

The other company gave much a lower price. We couldn't match the AlgoSec price level to that particular vendor. I think the company and customer were really impressed with our presentation and demonstration that we gave. They even told us if we can reduce our pricing by a certain level, they can take us because they are impressed with our product, but the pricing won't do. But when we tried to AlgoSec to reduce the cost so we can get this deal they couldn't match it to that level. Unfortunately, we lost the customer.

It was not a one day effort that we put into submitting these documents, to comply to their requirements, and do a demonstration. They were convinced to take this product, but because of the pricing issue we lost it. We all got disappointed about the support level.

I find AlgoSec more organized than some of the other products. With some other products, you have to go here and there to check it, but with AlgoSec it's more organized. But, I find some of the other products more customizable than AlgoSec. It takes a little bit of time to do the customization, for example, if you need to change or add some special level of approval or if you need to add three different levels of approvals for a particular workflow. To do that, sometimes you have to contact AlgoSec's regional support. But with other products that I know, it's just a matter of adding a particular character to the workflow. In some cases I have found other products that are useful, but in terms of organization, I find AlgoSec easier and more manageable than some of the other products.

I have learned so many lessons here. A secure environment is your main asset. When you have a secure environment you can always run your business smoothly, do your changes smoothly, and do your daily tasks smoothly. A secure and safe environment is the key to a successful IT business. That's the main point that I've learned from this.

If you're implementing, I always recommend AlgoSec and to check whether it can cater to their needs. Most of the time, it is capable. It's capable of handling your requirements most of the time.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give AlgoSec a seven.

This is taking into consideration the support and everything else. Any talks about AlgoSec and you need to consider their support level.

Many of our customers have big networks with several different vendors of telecom and firewall equipment. This means that network management overhead is significant and manual firewall rule modification is slow and error-prone.

Many firewalls have a bunch of redundant and often unused rules and that decrease overall network performance. The AlgoSec ASMS solution gives customers a very powerful tool for taking control over their firewall policies and to speed up their network security operations and incident response.

AlgoSec ASMS brings a holistic view of network firewall policy and automates firewall security management in very large-sized environments. Additionally, it speeds up the changes in firewall rules with a vendor-agnostic approach. As a result, the security and accuracy of firewall rules are increased.

Another very helpful feature of the AlgoSec ASMS solution is the ability to automate the mapping between applications and IT systems traffic requirements, and firewall rule base in couple with security risks analysis and compliance.

The AlgoSec solution consists of several modules and each of them improves the environment in a specific area. The Firewall analyzer produces a holistic view of the network topology with knowledge of firewall policies, security risks, and compliance.

The Fireflow module automates the change management process and is tightly integrated with the Firewall Analyzer to achieve compliance with minimal exposure.

The AppViz module allows for mapping applications and IT systems, their traffic with vulnerabilities, and firewall rules and policies.

The initial setup can be complex for beginners.

We started to offer AlgoSec ASMS solution to our Customers in 2015.

Scalability is good if you choose the right sizing of hardware and design.

We have had several projects with other firewall management solutions, and our customers choose AlgoSec because it's very flexible.

The setup is easy when you know what to do. The solution has many options to customize and tune.

Our company engineers implemented the solution.

We have evaluated Tufin and Skybox.

For many customers in Russia, the support of local firewall and network vendors' equipment is very important and they will be happy to get that from AlgoSec.

In Russia, there are several common firewall and VPN solutions that are widly deployed over the country. Sometimes, the use of these products is required by regulation, whereas other times, customers prefer using Russian devices to lower foreign vendor dependency risks. It also ensures that no foreign sanctions will break their network and security operations.

Having the support of these devices is very important for our customers.

We primarily use AlgoSec to just have a check on what firewall rule sets have been configured over a period of time, and if there are any redundancies within those rules, that we can eliminate without any confusion within the ruleset. It allows us to have the optimum support and effectiveness of the firewalls.

Doing the analysis of rule sets is very useful for us.

Being able to make and implement changes within a timeline is a very valuable aspect of the solution.

The solution is easy to navigate.

The initial setup is straightforward.

AlgoSec can probably do better at introducing features for the cloud firewall scenarios. This is something that will probably help customers. It needs a hybrid scenario that includes private cloud, public cloud, and on-prem things. If a feature could cover all three different types of deployment, that could probably make it even more desirable for clients.

I've been dealing with the solution for two and a half years at this point.

We've not received any complaints so far when it comes to stability. So far, our capabilities mapped with AlgoSec has always achieved the best of results for our customers. There don't seem to be bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

We haven't heard anything from clients that would lead us to believe they couldn't scale the solution if they needed to.

The technical support is quite good. I would rate them eight or nine out of ten.

There are some points wherein when it comes to support, my engineer may not have gotten direct support immediately. In the past, my engineer might have to wait half an hour or one hour to get an answer, and then, of course, the customer is also waiting. That slightly impacts my customer experience. Due to that aspect, I am reducing one or two points for that. However, overall, we're pretty satisfied with the solution.

I use a few other solutions as well. More often, I would advise clients to go with AlgoSec. Of course, as a secondary option, if our customers personally had some other preference, my experience is that they tend to go for Tufin rather than Skybox.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not complex. We don't face any challenges on that front.

We both deploy the solution and manage the solution for our customers.

In terms of pricing, it would be useful if they could be a bit more aggressive to their competition in the market. They need more aggressive pricing. That would be certainly more helpful to the market overall.

We have relationships with AlgoSec, Skybox, and Tufin. We are resellers as well as value-added service partners of all three solutions.

Our experience is across the board. What we advise depends on our customers' requirements and preferences. Based on that, we suggest select solutions.

We have a cloud model that we have worked out with AlgoSec. We are their managed security service partners. Along with that, we also do the on-prem deployment, especially in the Indian government sector.

Overall, I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. I've had a fantastic experience with it so far.

We primarily use AlgoSec for Firewall Security Management, Firewall Policy Automation, and Auditing. Our firewall estate environment is complex, multi-vendor, and across many sites, so we needed a product that would integrate seamlessly, encompassing all sites and platforms.

It's an ongoing process and we are constantly learning about new features of the product that would be beneficial in terms of helping secure, consolidate, and streamline our environment.

We are well on the road to achieving this with the help of their Professional Services team.

It has saved us much time, helping us work smarter and more efficiently with regards to policy/ruleset management, automation, and consolidation. This product has saved us numerous person-hours in terms of automation and consolidation.

The various elements of the product have allowed us to cover all aspects of Firewall Security Management, Firewall Policy Automation, and Auditing, which all help to leverage the product's full potential.

Having learned more about the product, going forward we believe it will allow us to benefit in additional areas of Firewall security management. 

We have found the Firewall analyzer to be most valuable in terms of policy ruleset management. However, policy ruleset management, automation, and auditing are all good features.

The complete and end-to-end visibility and analysis it provides of the policy rule base is invaluable and saves countless time and effort.

The automation possibilities the FireFlow product provides will also be very useful going forward in terms of time and effort saved, as well as reliability and efficiency.

Overall, the Firewall Analyzer is hugely beneficial in terms of policy ruleset management.

Nothing comes to mind in terms of things that need to be improved.

In terms of additional features in the next release, more integration with SD-WAN would be valuable.

I would also like to see more integration with Cloud security products and services but overall, the product compatibility and integration with multi-vendor and differing platforms/environments is pretty comprehensive. That said, with the fast-moving nature of SD-wan and Cloud Security, product features and enhancements will need to keep pace because clearly, Cloud Security is where the industry will be focusing. 

We have been using AlgoSec for nearly a year.

AlgoSec is as stable as can be expected.

It is highly scalable and more than meets the requirements for our environment.

They were very good, responsive, knowledgeable, and usually resolved issues quickly.

We did not use another product prior to AlgoSec for the same purpose.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward; however, with the usual initial setup niggles and teething issues.

The Professional Services team assisted us and had a very good level of expertise.

ROI is very well leveraged.

Setup cost and pricing were reasonable and the licensing was straightforward.

We didn't evaluate other products as we had a previous, much smaller deployment of AlgoSec that we were happy with.

Overall, I am happy with the product; it meets and even exceeds our expectations and ticks all the boxes in terms of reasons for purchasing it.

Increase the visibility of CyberSec and the area of compliance (audit) of the environment, with the AFA increasing the visibility of vulnerabilities in the environment caused by extensive configurations, and with the AFF optimizing the operation, allowing to focus on improvements.

We implemented in an environment with more than 280 Firewalls from different manufacturers and the AlgoSec solution enabled a more detailed analysis of the environment, ensuring greater security.

It made it possible to reduce the performance of the operating team in the reactive combat of threats, making the operation more active and focused on quality.

Reducing operational costs and decreasing the cat's time with rework and unproductive audits.

We find that the traffic simulation query, active change, policy optimization, FireFlow, and map features are especially useful. All other features of the app are also valuable.

The time spent on auditing before AlgoSec was very heavy, at least one analyst dedicated for a week for small audits, and for most, we lost an analyst for weeks.

After implementing AlgoSec, we reduced the audit time to three days.

The environment is much safer with more active configurations.

Analysis of the environment to optimize the use of the solution (firewall) and obtain a greater view of compliance.

Optimizing the operation making it possible to focus on other improvements.

The possibility for the end-user to request their rule and ensure that policies are complied with using AlgoSec adds greater security, and it also speeds up the request process. It also makes it possible to automate the implementation of rules.

The user receives the information if his request is within the policies and can continue the request, or if it is denied, the applicant must adjust their request to stay within the policies. The time spent for this without AlgoSec is up to one week, whereas with AlgoSec, in a maximum of 15 minutes we have the request analyzed.

I would like to see support more technologies, but I know that AlgoSec is always in the process of evolution.

Perhaps a better financial option would allow customers to choose the complete solution. In an environment that is very large, with many firewalls and routers, it is sometimes impossible to buy all of the licenses. This makes the AFF solution impossible.

This product is stable. There have been a few problems, but when there is some instability the support is always available.

Scalability-wise, this product is good. You can increase capacity simply by buying more licenses.

We had a few cases where we needed support, but whenever we did, it was available, and with the information needed to solve the problems.

The initial setup is easy and simple.

Always by supplier, highly qualified work with positive results.

The solution has a high cost, but the reduction in operation pays the investment.

For the AFF solution, it is necessary to purchase a license for each network asset so that the solution is complete, depending on the size of the environment. 

Before choosing this product, we evaluated SolarWinds and FireMon.

Overall, this is a good product and it meets the needs of customers.

We use AlgoSec to see where our firewalls stand, configuration-wise, and where we can make the policies safer for the environment. We are a large Government organization that provides critical services to the community.

We have a mix of ASA and Firepower that we use in the environment. The tempo is pretty high and there is a large amount of opportunity for error due to the size of the team and sometimes lacking in technical experience with configuring the firewall platforms.

This tool allows us to check the config really easily.

Our pen testers were constantly using AlgoSec for the firewall assessments, even when going with different vendors. We decided to buy the product in order to check the policy in real-time and ensure there were not miss-configurations that would linger until next year's pen test.

We also get an automated email of firewall changes in addition to being able to see if there are any rules that are poorly configured.

I am less stressed thinking there could be a glaring misconfiguration that could cause an incident.

We primarily use the firewall analyzer feature. It is really great for looking at stuff like PCI, HIPPA, etc. There are sometimes false positives but I don't know of a product out there that does not have false positives.

The firewall analyzer is great if you deploy a new firewall platform and need to see if it provides an adequate level of protection, where you don't have any dangerous rules.

I like the peace of mind that we get from seeing what our overall score is for the configs. I also like that I can check against PCI requirements.

This is a tough one because it has a lot of good features.

I think that the rate of false positives can be improved. I would like a FireFlow or packet-tracer-like capability at a lower licensing level.

I liked the additional capabilities for an analyst or lower-level network admin or service desk tech to be able to check the rules to see if there is something blocking the traffic. However, I was not able to get the licensing approved above just FA.

I like the training available as it is very informative, but, I wish it was just available from YouTube and I could easily play it from my cell phone without additional logins.

I have been using AlgoSec for a few years.

We just relied on tech skills and pen tests. This way led us to be reactionary instead of getting ahead of problems.

Setup was not too difficult.

The cost is kind of high but I really did not check any other vendors.

I did not evaluate other options. I do like NetBrain's Path tool. This gives us a similar capability to FireFlow and has some other really great tools. 

The primary use case of this solution was to optimize and cleanup all the unused legacy firewall rules from multiple firewalls which was massive in terms of time and effort.

The other user case in our environment was to automate all the manual day to day firewall changes to reduce the turnaround time for application owners.

We wanted to have central visibility for our entire firewall portfolio to see the firewall flow of traffic traversing through multiple layers of firewalls.

Definitely with the help of this solution it made our life easier to optimize and clean up the task within a short span of time which provided the quick visibility of all the rules to be actioned.

Traffic Analyzer provided the centralized view for our IT SOC operations to focus mainly on high-risk firewall rules exposing with explicit any rules.

The other best feature is the Fire flow module which is in the process of implementation to automate the firewall rules changes along with the workflow model right from the requester to the implementer.

Both the modules of AlgoSec solution which has been on-boarded in our environment are amazing to use it as it provides a central end to end visibility of the firewall rules spanning across the multiple layers of the firewall.

It's helping our Risk and Compliance team to assess all our firewall rules periodically and help us to remain compliant. 

It saves a lot of manual time especially in daily operations and increases the turnaround time for business.

It has helped us internally to provide the documentation for our auditing and reporting purposes.

AlgoSec should explore integrating more multi-vendor platforms and should be looking towards ready infrastructure for providing Infrastructure as service (IAAS) on any cloud platforms as the trend and technology is gradually moving from In House platforms to Cloud platforms.

Algosec should also be exploring the integration with the open source firewalls as well.

The GUI features of Algosec solution should be more flexible to use and adopt.

We have been using this solution for one year.

In terms of scalability, it's a license-based model to add license at any point of time when you have any new firewalls added in the portfolio.

Customer service is good but needs more improvement to be on listening side of the customers.

No, this is the first time we have introduced this solution.

Our Initial setup was not so straight forward as we were exploring all the features to its depth so lots of engagement was done with OEM level to explore and implement in our environment.

We went through local vendor support however the involvement from OEM was also huge and phenomenal.

Definitely the simplicity to use this solution is the key factor to be a leader in this competition and the other factor is the response and support model.

We went through the RFP process evaluation for all the magic quadrant leaders of the  market.

We use it daily to check existing rules created on all our firewalls and existing flows that are allowed, and if we can improve the performance of our firewalls by just doing the rearrangement of rules, etc.

We got more productive and agile using the product since the most time consuming job of our team is the creation of firewall rules, analyzing what is already created based on the requests of our users and internal costumers. The solution provides us an in-depth detail of what we have already in production and what we can do to resolve tickets/requests in the most effective way.

We now have more visibility into our firewall and security environment using a single pane of glass. We have a better audit of what our network and security engineers are doing on each device and are now able to see how much we are complaint with our baseline.

The product gave us more agility in the process to analyze and resolve tickets by requesting permissions to access services not enabled by default. At the same time, providing visibility of what we can improve on the scenario that we are already running on it.

The quick wins that the product can help us to achieve. With a few rule arrangements, we can improve the rule processing of the firewalls, increasing their performance and reducing possible bottlenecks, but keep us under the defined baseline of the company.

Also, the gain on the agility of checking what we already have created. The rules that can accommodate new requests instead of creating new rules have definitely helped us to resolve tickets in a faster way, achieving the expected SLA from users and internal customers of the company.

The product should support more vendors with the same in-depth analysis that it already is providing. This would give more reasons to for other companies to adopt it and make us preserve the investment in case we change the running environment.

Five months.

It is very stable without any major issues.

We don't see scalability on this product as a showstopper. We are confident that we can grow without any impact.

Very good. They helped us on everything that we needed.

We stopped using FireMon due to the price and lack of features.

No.

Through a vendor who fulfilled all our expectations.

It is fair. 

For cloud environments, it can be expensive. The model adopted to use as licensing for the cloud environment should be reviewed since it sometimes can increase the value of the service/product in an unexpected way. For example, they should instead use the amount of instances, which should just take into consideration the number of Security Groups and ACLs.

No.