No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure Firewall vs McAfee StoneGate [EOL] comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 30, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortinet FortiGate
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
592
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (2nd), Firewalls (1st), Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (1st), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (1st), WAN Edge (1st), ZTNA (1st), Unified Threat Management (UTM) (1st)
Cisco Secure Firewall
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
464
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (4th), Cisco Security Portfolio (2nd)
McAfee StoneGate [EOL]
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Mageshwaran S - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect at airtel
Enables customers to manage security effortlessly with intuitive features and easy integration
In terms of improvements for Fortinet FortiGate, they could offer evaluation licenses, as compared to Meraki, which provides a 90-day evaluation. In Fortinet FortiGate, they do not provide standard evaluation licenses; instead, we need to request them from the OEM through the account manager for POCs. If we want to conduct a demo, we need to work with real hardware. In comparison to Cisco, we have DCloud, which helps with providing demos to customers, but in Meraki, I need to reach out to them, book a lab, and they need to provide all the hardware. I need remote access and L3 engineers to program it; only then can I offer a real-time demo to the customer.
RajeshKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Consultant at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified policies have strengthened zero-trust demos and automate rapid threat containment
Feedback and Improvement Areas – Cisco Secure Firewall (Customer Perspective) From a customer point of view, there are a few improvement areas observed while positioning Cisco Secure Firewall in competitive scenarios. 1. Dashboard & Visibility Enhancements Customers often compare firewall dashboards across different OEMs during evaluation. * Competing vendors typically provide more feature-rich and visually detailed dashboards. * There is a perception that Cisco dashboards still require enhancement in terms of visualization, consolidated reporting, and built-in analytics. * Some OEMs advertise additional security capabilities clearly within their publicly available data sheets, making competitive positioning easier. In comparison, Cisco sometimes references separate documentation or explains how certain capabilities (such as anti-spam or antivirus functionality) can be achieved through integration or ecosystem components rather than native, built-in features. This creates a perception gap during customer discussions. Improvement Opportunity: * Enhance dashboard capabilities. * Clearly articulate feature availability in public documentation and data sheets. * Reduce dependency on cross-referenced documentation for commonly compared features. 2. Virtual Firewall / Multi-Instance Capabilities in Lower Models Another competitive challenge relates to virtual firewall capabilities. * Several OEMs provide virtual firewall (VDOM-like) functionality in lower-end models. * In Cisco’s portfolio, multi-instance capability typically starts from higher-end platforms such as the 3K series or higher. * Customers looking for smaller deployments with logical segmentation are often forced to consider higher models, resulting in a price jump. Competitors also offer: * Compact hardware models * Dongle-based firewall appliances * Smaller entry-level products with virtual segmentation In Cisco’s case: * To achieve similar multi-instance functionality, customers must opt for higher-tier models. * This creates a significant pricing gap in entry-level or SMB deployments. This pricing difference becomes a key factor when customers compare solutions. If competitors offer a lower-cost model with virtual segmentation, and Cisco requires a higher platform investment, customers may lean toward alternative OEMs. 3. Documentation Gaps – OT Protocol Visibility In our lab environment, we have deployed Cisco Secure Firewall and are using Application Visibility and Control (AVC) for OT network monitoring. Observations: * OT protocols are clearly visible within application visibility. * The firewall successfully identifies and classifies OT traffic. However: * This capability is not clearly mentioned in publicly available documentation. * When a feature is available and functional, it should be explicitly documented in data sheets and feature guides. The need for third-party integration depends on what we are looking for. Here I am saying that the integration with Cisco NAC can be done because RTC functionality is only available with Cisco ISE and the firewall integration. For other ecosystems, if we use a NAC solution that is not Cisco, we can still integrate it for user authentication, such as with VPN user authentication. But in that case, we don't achieve the same functionality, such as RTC with other NAC solutions. This is one aspect. Another part is that if we are using it, it always happens with some NAC solutions because we have Cisco NAC and Cisco firewall; we want consistent policy across the network, whether the user is on-prem or using VPN services. If this is a unified OEM solution, in that case, we require an agent, such as the Cisco Secure Client. That allows us to easily check the posture status of the remote user and connect to the network effortlessly. But if we are using a third-party solution, we can't achieve that. From a SIEM perspective, certain prerequisites must be fulfilled before integration with Cisco Secure Firewall can be completed. The feasibility of integration depends on the capabilities of the SIEM platform. If the SIEM solution supports the required APIs and event handling mechanisms, similar functionality can be achieved. Therefore, integration itself is generally not the challenge; the key consideration is the desired security outcome within the overall ecosystem. If the customer does not have a SIEM solution and intends to automate quarantine actions or enforce restricted access for users, a Network Access Control (NAC) solution becomes mandatory. In this scenario, the recommended NAC solution is Cisco Identity Services Engine (Cisco ISE). Automated quarantine and dynamic access control workflows are dependent on NAC capabilities. From a feature enhancement perspective for Cisco Secure Firewall, deeper NAC-driven integration adds significant value. 1. TrustSec / Tag-Based Policy Enforcement Cisco ISE supports Cisco TrustSec, which enables Security Group Tag (SGT)-based segmentation. * In traditional (legacy) networks, firewall policies are created based on IP addresses. * With TrustSec, policies are defined based on user identity, group membership, and security tags instead of IP subnets. * When users authenticate to the network, Cisco ISE assigns Security Group Tags (SGTs). * These tags are shared with Cisco Secure Firewall. * The firewall then enforces policies based on SGT-to-SGT rules rather than IP-to-IP rules. Benefits: * Significant reduction in the number of firewall rules * Simplified policy management * Improved scalability * Easier implementation of role-based access control This integration enhances operational efficiency and security posture. 2. Rapid Threat Containment (RTC) Another key capability is Rapid Threat Containment (RTC). If Cisco Secure Firewall detects malicious activity—such as malware download attempts identified via signature-based or advanced threat detection—it can notify Cisco ISE about the compromised endpoint. Based on this input: * Cisco ISE can automatically quarantine the user * The endpoint can be moved to a restricted VLAN * Access can be dynamically limited without manual intervention This automated workflow ensures faster response time and reduces the risk of lateral movement within the network. 3. VPN and Posture Assessment This functionality is not limited to wired or LAN users. For VPN users: * Authentication can be integrated with third-party NAC solutions. * However, if posture assessment (device compliance checking) is required in addition to authentication, Cisco ISE integration with Cisco Secure Firewall becomes essential. Cisco ISE enables: * Endpoint posture validation * Dynamic policy assignment * Automated remediation workflows
it_user935460 - PeerSpot reviewer
Computer Framework at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It works well with a highly-active cluster.
It is important for us in case of a disaster, or in case of a failure of one server. This means that the high availability is the most important part for us. It is important for us that the system is available and no connection is going to be lost if the system is restarting one note, or something like that. This is the main request for us for a good firewall protection product.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Web filtering and two-factor authentication are great features."
"Web filtering is the most useful feature."
"The cost of the solution is very good in the context of other, similar solutions on the market."
"The support is good because, although the response time for tickets may occasionally take some time, at the end of the day they have always solved the issue at hand."
"I find that Fortinet FortiGate is pretty easy to use and integrated, offering many features in one box at a decent price compared to other enterprise vendors."
"The feature that I find most valuable is its protection of the websites."
"The best feature of Fortinet FortiGate is its SD-WAN capability, which is included and differs from other products that require an additional license."
"FortiGate Secure SD-WAN includes best-of-breed next-generation firewall (NGFW) security, SD-WAN, advanced routing, and WAN optimization capabilities, delivering a security-driven networking WAN edge transformation in a unified offering."
"Before Firepower, we didn't have any visibility about what attack was happening or what's going on from the inside to outside or the outside to inside, and after Firepower and the reporting that Firepower generates, I can see what's going on: which user visits the malicious website, or which user uploaded or downloaded malicious code, and what the name of the code is and from which country, which is very useful and helpful for me to detect what's going on and enables me to solve any problem."
"The VPN and monitoring are the most valuable features."
"There are some hiccups here and there, but compared to the technical support from other vendors, I have had the best experience with Cisco's technical support. I would rate them at nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Firewall for me relates to the remote access VPN, because companies need multi-factor authentication."
"With FirePOWER services, we have been able to have more insight of our network, something that we never had before, now we can see all the applications that our users are using the most and we can see if there is malware on our network."
"With Cisco, it's the security intelligence part; it's quite simple to configure and very effective, cutting down on a lot of trouble in the early phases."
"With Cisco's Firepower Management, we're able to have that push up to basically one monitor and one UI and be able to track that and stop threats immediately."
"Netting is one of the best features. We can modify it in different ways. Site-to-site VPN is also an awesome feature of Cisco ASA. The biggest advantage of Cisco products is technical support. They provide the best technical support."
"High availability is very consistent and provides good firewalling and stability."
"The stability of the product is fantastic; it is a really proven system and I never had any type of problem where the system was unstable or had a software failure."
"It works well with a highly-active cluster."
"It has given us better application control."
"We did not have issues with scalabiliy."
 

Cons

"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"The non-error conserve mode has room for improvement."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"We would like to have the ability to disable some of the security functionalities."
"In their datasheet, they put the throughput as huge, but once you enable all the features of the box, the performance is impacted dramatically."
"Improvements could be made when companies expand and need better equipment and more licenses."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"It can probably provide a holistic view of different appliances because many customers do not have only one brand, besides the traditional SNMP protocols, to cover all their devices. There are some specific requirements in terms of configurations or actions that sometimes have to be done in a very manual way because of the different versions or brands in a customer's infrastructure. It could also have some additional analytics capabilities. It has some very interesting ways to monitor the traffic and identify false positives from the architecture and the environment. It would be good if there is a way to patch with some other industry-specific solutions and synchronize some of the information, such as what other customers experience in their operations and probably share some additional information that could be leveraged or shared among the industry. Such information would be something interesting to see. It could have AI capabilities related to how the appliances could benefit from learning the current environment and different exposures."
"Other products are becoming easier to access and configure. They are providing UI interfaces to configure, take backup, synchronize redundant machines, and so on. It is very easy to take backup and upgrade the images in those products. Cisco ASA should have such features. If one redundant machine is getting upgraded, the technology and support should be there to upgrade other redundant machines. In a single window, we should be able to do more in terms of backups, restores, and upgrades."
"I would like to see the following made easier: Objects Removing objects Correlating access rules and AnyConnect ACLs."
"The usability of Cisco Firepower Threat Defense is an issue. The product is still under development, and the user interface is very difficult to deal with."
"The cost is very high. Most organizations cannot afford it."
"On the basic configurations and day-to-day tasks that we are having using this tool, it is much easier to use Palo Alto than Cisco Secure Firewall."
"It is hard to collaborate with our filtered environment."
"In today's world, cyberattacks have become a common occurrence. However, so far, we have not faced any issues with our systems. I hope the situation remains the same in the future. If Cisco introduces even more advanced security measures, it would be beneficial."
"The hardware needs improving as we had a lot of problems with the hard drive reliability, both with the firewall and the intrusion protection system."
"HA failover is not stable."
"After some experience with the solution, we had to do some redesign, but generally, we were happy with the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price for the Fortinet FortiGate is reasonable. Secure SD-WAN is free of charge. If you have their firewall, it's free of charge. It's very tempting."
"It's an expensive solution"
"I would rate pricing to be about four or five out of ten, it is reasonable."
"The solution is cheap."
"Work through partners for the best pricing."
"The initial setup is super straight forward and as far as the licensing goes for the small product that we have, the pricing was pretty competitive. It wasn't as simple and as cheap as a SonicWall but for the service we would get it was a good price."
"It is cheaper and more competitive compared to other options. For example, when comparing Palo Alto products to others, Palo Alto tends to be more expensive. If you compare Cisco's platform, including Cisco Meraki, with Fortinet products, you'll notice that Cisco's offerings are generally higher priced than Fortinet's firewall solutions."
"The pricing for this solution is reasonable."
"Pricing depends on partnerships and certifications."
"I think Cisco's price is in the right space now. They have discounts for customers at various levels. I think they're in the right spot. However, Cisco can be expensive when you factor in these additional features."
"Its price is in the middle range. Both Firepower and FortiGate are not cheap. Palo Alto and Check Point are the cheapest ones. I don't remember any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The pricing is very good for us, especially since we have a partnership with Cisco. The challenge is the licensing. There are competitors that offer more flexible licensing, such as daily licensing, some offer hourly, but Cisco is locked in for one, three, and five years. We don't have much flexibility, especially if we want to shift applications or shift users at any time. Hopefully, licensing becomes more flexible."
"It definitely competes with the other vendors in the market."
"Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions."
"Cisco Secure Firewall is a moderately priced solution."
"Cisco is always expensive, but you get what you pay for. It is expensive for a reason. It is a good solution, and good solutions cost money."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at Webernetz.net - Network Security Consulting
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business370
Midsize Enterprise138
Large Enterprise195
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business192
Midsize Enterprise130
Large Enterprise236
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...
What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?
From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know...
What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?
As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite ...
Which is better - Fortinet FortiGate or Cisco ASA Firewall?
One of our favorite things about Fortinet Fortigate is that you can deploy on the cloud or on premises. Fortinet Fort...
How does Cisco's ASA firewall compare with the Firepower NGFW?
It is easy to integrate Cisco ASA with other Cisco products and also other NAC solutions. When you understand the Cis...
Which is better - Meraki MX or Cisco ASA Firewall?
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) software is the operating software for the Cisco ASA suite. It supports netw...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Fortinet FortiGate Next-Generation Firewall
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Cisco Secure Firewall ASA Virtual - BYOL
McAfee Next Generation Firewall, Stonesoft, Intel Next Generation Firewall, Intel Security StoneGate
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.
Avency, R€SLER Oberfl_chentechnik GmbH, MAUSER Group, CEMEX, Cegedim, Fusion Media Networks
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Netgate, Sophos and others in Firewalls. Updated: May 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.