TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Cisco Firepower 2100 Series vs. Stonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cisco Firepower 2100 Series

    Score9 out of 10
    N/ACisco offers the Firepower 2100 Series NGFW, designed to allow businesses to gain resiliency through superior security with sustained performance. The Firepower 2100 Series has a dual multicore CPU architecture that optimizes firewall, cryptographic, and threat inspection functions simultaneously, to achieve security doesn’t come at the expense of network performance.N/A

    Stonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)

    Score7.8 out of 10
    N/AStonesoft firewalls were acquired and rebranded as McAfee Firewall Enterprise (MFE), then divested by McAfee and acquired by Forcepoint in 2016, and have reached end of life (EOL).N/A
    Pricing
    Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesStonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Editions & Modules
    Firepower 2100
    3,000-20,000
    per appliance
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesStonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details
    More Pricing Information
    Features
    Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesStonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Firewall
    Comparison of Firewall features of Cisco Firepower 2100 Series and Stonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Feature
    Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
    8.4
    1 Ratings
    3% below category average
    Stonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    -
    Ratings
    Identification Technologies7.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Content Inspection9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Policy-based Controls9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Active Directory and LDAP6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Firewall Management Console10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Reporting and Logging9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    VPN10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    High Availability10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Stateful Inspection8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Proxy Server6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesStonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Small Businesses
    SonicWall NSA Series
    Score8.5 out of 10
    SonicWall NSA Series
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Barracuda CloudGen Firewall
    Score9.4 out of 10
    Barracuda CloudGen Firewall
    Score9.4 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software
    Score9 out of 10
    Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software
    Score9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesStonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Likelihood to Recommend
    5.5
    (2 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesStonesoft Firewall (Discontinued)
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Cisco
    The Cisco [Firepower] 2100 [Series] is an easy sell for anyone looking. You already know Cisco excels in the security department, but now that firepower lives right on the box and inline with the rest of the firewall data flow you can save yourself a lot of time and headaches. Unless you cant quite afford Cisco's 2100 line, there's not much reason to go with the competition.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Discontinued Products
    Any scenario where a dedicated firewall administrator is on staff and a secure firewall solution that requires high availability is needed will be a good solution for the McAfee Firewall Enterprise product. The McAfee Firewall Enterprise however comes with some of its own parlance that is different from other vendors and does require some comfort on the administrators side when it comes to working in the command line. Added knowledge of protocols and how they interact is a must for any firewall admin but particularly for the McAfee Firewall Enterprise product due to its flexible nature. If the environment is to be mostly hands off where a very limited rule set is to be configured and not likely to change often, I would defer to a different product
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Cisco
    • For us, to power the whole system does scaling quite a bit. So we can definitely have a lot of room to grow if needed. The device can support a lot of way more than we need right now, but in the future, if we need more it seems to be a big pro of that. Also the support of Cisco, knowing that it's backed by Cisco definitely is good. You guys are the largest players in the market
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Discontinued Products
    • Based on the SecureComputing Sidewinder firewalls, the McAfee Firewall Enterprise does similar backend containerization of each service which provides for added security in the unlikely event of failures or breeches.
    • Tie in reporting services (if used by the admin) provide very granular details on rules accessed and the firewalls response to the requests.
    • Configurable options are plentiful. Unbound DNS can be configured on each "burb" (SecureComputing/McAfee parlance for interface), similar options for sendmail while rulesets can be configured at the application level down to simple IP-filter making options for enhancing security as well as troubleshooting equally as useful.
    • Full control over shell for scripting and/or scheduling (cron) purposes.
    • Solid HA and patching architecture.
    • Support was always helpful, knowledgeable and insightful (especially the staff that migrated from SecureComputing).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Cisco
    • Cisco patches bugs quickly but patches are slow to install and reboot
    • Smart licensing is getting better but still can be troublesome
    • Some weird visual interface glitches that require clicking the same options a few extra times
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Discontinued Products
    • For an application-layer firewall the applications supported (at the time I managed them) were too few and would need to be expanded and the application ruleset needed to be expanded as well.
    • The remote access VPN client configuration was overly complex for the average user and would need to be supplemented with a configuration file that had already been generated. Other solutions from CheckPoint or Cisco ASA are not as complex for end user remote access.
    • Enhancing the GUI with a builtin "packet capture" feature would be useful for administrators not familiar with tcpdump.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Discontinued Products
    Compared to other firewalls I've managed (Palo Alto, Cisco ASA & CheckPoint) I would say that McAfee Firewall Enterprise was probably at the time not the leader in its field however it is a product that proved its reliability and flexibility over the other vendors. The addition of many new features usually comes as a detriment to some other area (restricted CLI, decreased logging etc.). In my experience this product gave the flexibility and options that the organization needed.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Cisco
    • It's keeping threats out like a firewall should. Definitely cost wise it is at a higher cost center than other alternatives. Especially when it comes to licensing. Cisco is generally the higher, for perhaps, definitely for good reason, right? I mean, definitely positive impact as far as working as it should that's at cost.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Discontinued Products
    • In its highly available configuration the impact on any business objective has been positive given the fact that any downtime of the firewall would negatively impact all business objectives.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots