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

Cisco Secure Firewall vs GajShield Next Generation Firewall comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Firewall
Ranking in Firewalls
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
471
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (2nd)
GajShield Next Generation F...
Ranking in Firewalls
46th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 8.0%, up from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GajShield Next Generation Firewall 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 Firewall8.0%
GajShield Next Generation Firewall0.4%
Other91.6%
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
Nazish Sameer Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Network Security Engineer at UNITE HERE HEALTH
Simplifies the management of complex data networks, but its technical support could be improved
Sometimes, we have to use SD-WAN support for the solution, which can be improved by adapting some features that will help our approach to network services. The solution can adapt some of the tools where we, as network engineers, can adjust to the changing application needs. Also, the solution can provide us with multiple support, allowing us to create a network segment. The solution’s technical support could be improved.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of Cisco Secure Firewall include the next-generation firewall and its strong anti-malware capabilities."
"It has improved the security posture and visibility of our traffic."
"Cisco ASAv is good in many advanced networking features."
"The protection and security features, like URL filtering, the inspection, and the IPS feature, are also very valuable for us. We don't have IT staff at most of the sites so for us it's important to have a robust firewall at those sites"
"My advice for anybody who is implementing Cisco ASA is that it is not very difficult to deploy and not very difficult to understand how to continue adding more rules to it."
"We have not, as of now (touch wood) faced any issues; it's stable, and we don't face any performance issues as well, it's reliable, there are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze."
"Everyone who uses the platform has felt more confident in their perimeter security."
"Cisco has a very good team for support; they are always available, and they give you a flexible solution."
"The solution's outcome is very high, and we often use it in a very high-traffic environment."
"Gajshiled's enterprise cloud and DLP-level features give it an advantage over other products."
"The most valuable feature of the GajShield Next Generation Firewall is the user-friendly settings, dashboards, and anti-threat protection. Additionally, the solution upgrades frequently which is good because we receive new features."
"It is an easily scalable solution...The initial setup was very easy."
"Once it is configured, it is very stable, and we don't get any calls from our clients unless they have some specific requirement, like port forwarding or something."
"It is a stable solution."
"GajShield Next Generation Firewall's best feature is the network DLP."
"GajShield has improved our mobile device-based connectivity."
 

Cons

"The management of the firewalls could be improved because there are a lot of bugs."
"I'm working on a slightly older version, but what it needs is a better alert management. It's pretty standard, but there's no real advanced features involved around it."
"Cisco should redo their website so it's actually usable in a faster way."
"There are some limitations with SSL. Regarding the security assessment for the ISO 27000 standard, there are certain features that Cisco needs to scale up. Not all products support it, so you need to be slightly careful, especially on the site track."
"I have used Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Check Point previously and I prefer the process of everything working together."
"I think they need to review their whole UI because it feels like it was created by a whole bunch of different teams of developers who didn't fully talk to each other. The net policy screen is just a mess. It should look like the firewall policy screen, and they should both act the same, but they don't. I feel like it's two different buildings or programming, who don't talk to each other, and that really annoys me."
"On firewall features, Fortinet is better. Cisco needs to become more competitive and add more features or meet Fortinet's offering."
"Regarding stability and reliability, I have experienced false negative alerts with the CS models, which indicate that my switch has gone down when in reality, it has not. That is a fix that is needed."
"We raised a support ticket, and the project didn't get a proper response. There was a skill issue in TAC support."
"We face issues with some configuration parts that we don't understand in the solution, and sometimes we face issues with the VPN connection."
"The firewall configuration and administration screens could use some improvement."
"Sometimes, we have to use SD-WAN support for the solution, which can be improved by adapting some features that will help our approach to network services."
"GajShield Next Generation Firewall would be improved with the addition of a load-balancing feature."
"GajShield Next Generation Firewall could improve the flow of the settings. If somebody's using a Cisco firewall or any other brand and they want to use GajShield Next Generation Firewall the platform's UI is a bit different. If it was more similar to the others it would be better."
"Gajshield can improve SD-WAN compatibility at an enterprise cloud level."
"The UI for the administration of the firewall needs a lot of work."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We're using the smart license for this firewall. The models that we have require licensing for remote access."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing when compared to the market. Although, when you compare the benefits of support from Cisco, you can adjust the value and it becomes comparable, because you usually need very good support. So you gain value there with this device."
"The pricing was pretty comparable to other solutions when we purchased it."
"It's acceptable and comparable to other products."
"I know that licensing for some of the advanced solutions, like Intrusion Prevention and Secure Malware Analytics, are nominal costs."
"To discuss with Cisco Systems or their partners to gain the optimal price and to not consider, without verifying, the false information that Cisco ASA is very expensive."
"We used Check Point and the two are comparable. Cost was really what put us onto the ASAs... the price tag for Check Point was exorbitantly more than what it is for the ASA solution."
"GajShield is a cheaper solution as of now. The subscription is yearly."
"The price of the GajShield Next Generation Firewall is very attractive when compared to other solutions."
"GajShield Next Generation Firewall is cheaper than the other products in the market. The licensing costs for the solution are on a yearly basis."
"GajShield Next Generation Firewall is reasonably priced."
"GajShield Next Generation Firewall is not that expensive, and its pricing is better than Palo Alto."
"It was about 15% cheaper compared to Sophos."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 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
Outsourcing Company
15%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
19%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business195
Midsize Enterprise129
Large Enterprise243
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
 

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 ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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
GajShield NGFW
 

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.
Zodiac Clothing
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Firewall vs. GajShield Next Generation Firewall and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.