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

Cisco Secure Firewall vs Palo Alto Networks K2-Series comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 5, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
3.9
Cisco Secure Firewall delivers ROI by cutting costs, boosting security, simplifying management, and integrating advanced threat defense.
Sentiment score
6.2
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series improved cybersecurity, efficiency, and cost savings through enhanced visibility, automation, and reduced incident response times.
There is always a return on investment because you find you invest heavily, but your environment is secure and then you are at rest; you do not need to panic.
Specialist Datacenter And Server at IHS Towers
The biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is that there's no waste in any infrastructure cost and licensing costs for us.
Assistant Vice President at PLDT Enterprise
From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is the single pane of glass, which is a huge plus for us.
Network Engineer at a government with 10,001+ employees
For CN-Series, there is no competitor which works the same way as Palo Alto does.
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Cisco Secure Firewall support is responsive and expert, despite occasional initial delays and documentation issues.
Sentiment score
8.0
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series support is praised for vendor responsiveness and expertise, though partner support is less reliable.
I have to provide many logs, yet problems remain unresolved, often requiring workarounds rather than solutions.
VSO at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
I have been working with them on firewalls, wireless, switching, and routing, and the support is the best.
Principal Consultant at Epitome Infotech Solutions (P) Ltd
They have expertise and provide solutions for the most difficult problems.
Network Security Administrator at a government with 501-1,000 employees
I would rate tech support from Palo Alto Networks at around eight out of ten points because we had dedicated people assigned to us.
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
We get Gold support from them, and they are pretty good.
Design engineer at a construction company with 201-500 employees
I would rate the technical support for the Palo Alto Networks K2-Series from Palo Alto as nine out of ten points.
Director at MICROLOGIC NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.5
Cisco Secure Firewall offers scalable, flexible solutions for varying business sizes, supporting numerous users concurrently with cloud integration.
Sentiment score
7.8
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series offers scalable, flexible solutions for organizations, excelling in network expansion and handling diverse environments.
When something happens in the device, the failover happens very quickly without any interruption.
Network Unit Head at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees
Cisco Secure Cloud now allows us to potentially take the management functions of Cisco Secure Firewall, move it into the cloud, and integrate it with other Cisco security products, managing everything from one single pane.
Senior Network Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
I rate the scalability as a number 10.
Cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK For Computer Manufacturing (ECM)
Vertical scaling allows you to purchase more powerful devices with additional RAM, compute, and larger model form factors.
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Cisco Secure Firewall is praised for its stability, high performance, and reliability, especially in critical network environments.
Sentiment score
7.8
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is praised for exceptional stability and dependability, with minor configuration and maintenance issues reported.
We have often encountered split-brain scenarios during failover processes and code upgrades, which have been persistent problems for us.
Senior Manager, Network Engineering at TTi Power Equipment
We work with a cluster with high availability, so if something goes wrong, we have it functioning.
I have Cisco Secure Firewall in hospitals, hotels, airports, and shopping malls, and I have never faced complaints of a Cisco Secure Firewall crash or anything similar.
Sr Ict Engineer at ICAD-KSA
Palo Alto typically doesn't have many glitches.
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco Secure Firewall needs interface and cost improvements, enhanced features, better integration, and increased performance and automation.
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series needs better pricing, integration, usability, and AI to address user demands for support and scalability.
My ongoing complaint for the last six years has been the lack of CLI functionality, which hinders my ability to work on the firewall, alongside concerns regarding deployment time.
Senior Manager, Network Engineering at TTi Power Equipment
The GUI is useless for me and frustrates me to a very high degree, which led me to switch to the CLI for configuration.
Network Engineer at a logistics company with 10,001+ employees
Firewall as a Service can scale to a very large extent because it is a cloud-based offering that can scale up to a very large number, which is not a problem.
Chief Technology Officer at Binary Global Limited
Enhancing web traffic protection would be a great upgrade.
enterprise architect at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
L1 engineers cannot work on the Palo Alto Networks K2-Series because it's too complex, which requires L2 and above level of engineers.
Director at MICROLOGIC NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED
With AI, if there is a Precision AI bundle that you're planning on exploring, then that definitely needs a significant uplift because currently it doesn't work for all the known models.
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
 

Setup Cost

Cisco Secure Firewall is pricey but valued for reliability and features, with complex licensing and notable support benefits.
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is expensive, suitable for large enterprises, with straightforward licensing but requires frequent price negotiations.
It's good to have them, however, it costs us a lot.
It Administration at Dilcon Community School
Basically, the license for the VPNs is for all the interfaces, and that is the thing that is really expensive compared with Palo Alto.
Technical Account Manager at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
It's considered a premium, but people pay that price for Cisco.
Principal Consultant at Epitome Infotech Solutions (P) Ltd
It's a little bit expensive.
enterprise architect at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
The pricing for the Palo Alto Networks K2-Series solution is affordable.
Director at MICROLOGIC NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED
 

Valuable Features

Cisco Secure Firewall offers robust security features, centralized management, and easy integration, delivering stability and AI-driven performance optimization.
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series provides advanced, scalable security with AI-driven features, strong threat prevention, and user-friendly management.
What stands out positively about Cisco is their training and support, which has effectively prepared engineers to work with their products.
Senior Manager, Network Engineering at TTi Power Equipment
This is very important to my organization, as we work extensively with security because we are a bank, so we can keep the data safe.
Network Security Administrator at a government with 501-1,000 employees
Cisco Secure Firewall allows me to safeguard Layer 7 or Layer 3 and manage the security rules with the business needs of my organization.
Overall, the K2-Series helps in much more protection, and dashboard compliances are being met.
Director at MICROLOGIC NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED
We had configured dynamic user groups and App-ID based policies, which makes it all Zero Trust.
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Mainly, it is very easy to understand, and the logs are very good.
Design engineer at a construction company with 201-500 employees
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Firewall
Ranking in Firewalls
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
470
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (2nd)
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series
Ranking in Firewalls
36th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 7.7%, up from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewalls Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Firewall7.7%
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series0.4%
Other91.9%
Firewalls
 

Featured Reviews

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
Tejas Jain - PeerSpot reviewer
Principle Cloud Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Has provided strong traffic visibility and efficient policy management for advanced network environments
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series could be improved, though I don't think of much. I'm unsure how widespread the adoption for K2-Series alone is. Looking at the base Palo Alto capabilities, they are going in the right direction. K2 specifically about its efficacy with all these 5G protocols, the GPRS tunneling protocol performed without many hiccups during testing. With AI, if there is a Precision AI bundle that you're planning on exploring, then that definitely needs a significant uplift because currently it doesn't work for all the known models. There are many false positives that need to be addressed. While it's still ahead of its competitors, on the AI security side, there is quite a room for improvement.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 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
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
15%
Performing Arts
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business195
Midsize Enterprise130
Large Enterprise239
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise13
 

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 at large. In my opinion, Fortinet would be the best option and l use Fortinet too...
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 Fortigate is very stable, reliable, and consistent. We like that we can manage the e...
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 Cisco ecosystem, it is very simple to handle. This solution has traffic inspection ...
Features comparison between Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most. PA is good at app control, web filtering a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks K2-Series?
The pricing for the Palo Alto Networks K2-Series solution is affordable and there are no complaints about the licensing.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks K2-Series?
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series could be improved, though I don't think of much. I'm unsure how widespread the adoption for K2-Series alone is. Looking at the base Palo Alto capabilities, they are goi...
 

Also Known As

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
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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.
State of North Dakota, SEGA, Alameda County Office of Education, Temple University, VERGE, CAME
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks K2-Series and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.