FireMon Security Manager Reviews

We use FireMon for security management, to manage our security infrastructure. We also use it to do PCI compliance and to manage personal data and information related to the organization, and to prevent data loss. In addition, we use the admin console for firewall management, including firewall rules and to decommission firewalls when they are not in use. We use it to monitor our primary corporate DR firewalls as well.

In the past, we've had thousands of firewall rules that came from legacy applications and many years of work. FireMon has helped us to clean up those rules and to manage them properly. We can decommission rules that are old and outdated or clean them up. And we can work on the ones that are not functioning properly or that are configured improperly, to make them compliant and useful to the organization. It has helped us to manage multiple firewall rules and remove legacy ones that are not useful.

It helps by automating the process of cleaning up firewall rules in a large, enterprise environment. It's not done manually, which is a process that is more prone to errors and takes more time. When it's done manually it's more tedious and requires multiple resources dedicated to doing it. It helps reduce the time involved, increasing the efficiency and reducing the cost, as well as making the job more accurate.

The same is true when it comes to accurately creating, approving, and deploying firewall policy rules. It reduces the effort by 75 to 80 percent, compared to how we used to do it before we got FireMon. And we get that same percentage reduction in effort, 75 to 80 percent, when changing firewall policy rules.

It has also been very helpful in terms of the time and effort required to create compliance reports. Previously, when we used other applications or did it manually, we were not able to finish our work efficiently and on time. FireMon has helped us to cut the time it takes to do auditing and reporting of firewall rules, and increased our efficiency. 

It has cut both the man-hours spent as well as the number of staff members who are dedicated to firewall policy changes and the firewall policy update process, because it enables automation and simplifies the task. The reporting is also more efficient and more correct and useful.

FireMon has decreased errors and misconfigurations, issues that had increased risk in our environment, by 75 percent.

It also identifies risks in your environment and helps to prioritize fixes, if you have the necessary set of eyes to look at the rules and the resources. When FireMon gives you reports on what's going on in the environment, you assign staff members to rectify whatever issues it has reported and proactively prevent issues from arising in the future. It has improved our security posture drastically, and cut down the cost related to having third parties manage those things. We can do some of those things in-house. It has improved our security posture and senior management is happy because of that.

• The FireMon interface is very helpful.
• The configuration management for multiple firewalls is very easy to use.
• The backup facilities are very helpful as well.
• The troubleshooting and testing capabilities are very good.

The solution automatically warns you when new firewall rules, and changes to existing ones, violate compliance policies, before they are deployed. Sometimes we get "white noise," meaning false positives, but it's always good to have more information than less. That way we can switch it off and work when we see that it's giving a false positive. It does send us an alert to let us know that there are changes in the environment. That functionality is very important because automating such tasks is very helpful in managing our environments and preventing attacks. The earlier you notice issues going on in an environment, the easier it is for you to prevent certain incidents or mitigate risk.

We also use the solution’s SASE integration capabilities to extend security policy management for cloud firewall management. It helps in creating one consistent rule across multiple platforms and it improves accuracy. When you automate processes like that, they are able to run themselves. You create one set of rules and automate them to run. That enables you to find problems proactively, before they happen. It also enables you to have a consistent set of firewall rules, wherever you go. If you deploy new sites, you can apply the rules you already have in place to those sites. It creates a single platform, a single source of truth, for managing disparate environments and systems that are connected together.

I've used FireMon for nearly six years.

We don't have too many issues with FireMon. When it comes to the application, we don't have any issues. Sometimes we get white noise, meaning false positives, but that is just in terms of performance, and not necessarily the system itself.

Scaling is simple. You can easily scale it and maintain it with any size team.

We are using FireMon in a couple of departments. I work for a government office, and we have a lot of different departments under us. We have a need to increase our usage, because we always have people coming in. We're at the very beginning of moving to the cloud. When we move to the cloud, we're going to multiply our usage by at least tenfold, because people at remote locations will then be able to make use of the services.

We have at least half a dozen people using FireMon. Their roles include the people that manage the hardware that it's installed on as well as the admin managers who look at it day-to-day to see what the configuration is like. The admin guys can do analysis but there are also analysts who get the alerts and who work on the action items related to the alerts. They investigate and then they know what mitigation actions to take to prevent attacks or to deal with whatever FireMon is reporting on. For deployment and maintenance we need just three people.

Maintenance is connected with the need to upgrade. They have to seek funding for it to happen and get the funding arranged. If it doesn't require any funding, if it's just internal work that needs to be done, then the admin guys can do it without having to involve anyone else. If there's any need to connect with FireMon, that is done as well.

I would rate their tech support at seven out of 10. They do respond to us and they provide good service, but sometimes it takes time for them to get back to us or to get people to work on stuff. Overall, they are good.

Before FireMon, we used native solutions provided by Check Point. We switched because each of our departments has its requirements. They needed a product that would provide them with better service. They came to the central unit, which is where I work, to ask that something be procured, and that's why we procured FireMon. There are certain facilities in FireMon that give it an advantage over certain other companies or providers.

The initial setup can take some time, including connecting it and configuring it. It's not something that is easy for anybody to do. There is time and energy required because of the number of systems you have to configure to get it to work properly. The setup is a bit complex and tedious, especially for a new user who will need someone to hold their hand as they go through it. But after doing it a couple of times, or upgrading it a couple of times, it's not as tedious.

Our deployment took about two weeks. We first did a discovery of what we wanted FireMon to do for us, a discovery of our requirements. We determined the prerequisites that had to be installed and the system requirements. We then moved on to an initial assessment through a deployment in a test environment. After the testing and everything working out, we further configured it to fine-tune it to our own specific environment. After all that was working okay, we went ahead to the final deployment. But for subsequent sites, it might just take a couple of days.

There is a learning curve as well to get used to the system and all the nitty-gritty knowledge needed to configure it and run it properly. Another thing that is time-consuming and tough to do is tagging stuff the right way.

We used a consultant, either DXC, which is a subsidiary of HPE, or Epic, which is a local consultant. Our experience with them was good.

We're billed monthly.

Sometimes, if there's a need for an upgrade or there is a system failure, there might be extra cost involved, such as for consultants or to procure the necessary equipment. We might be needing an upgrade very soon, and there will be costs connected with that.

We looked at a couple of other companies. We chose FireMon because of its cost and its simplicity, as well as its deployment and provisioning. We read reviews like this one, and we were quite confident because of what they described as their use and what their outcomes were.

My advice would be to do an appraisal of your environment and list out your requirements and what you are hoping to achieve. Then look at a couple of companies that are in competition with FireMon and look at user reviews to see if your requirements are met best by FireMon or their competitors. That is the procedure we used to choose FireMon.

If a colleague at another company said to me that firewall policy rule cleanup and management is important, but it's not a priority compared to more urgent things, I would say that there are a lot of bottlenecks and there is a reduction in service due to misconfigured or old firewall rules. They can prevent people from working properly. In the past, those issues hampered our network bandwidth and data movement. There were too many firewall rules that did recursive checks. There was increased latency and reduced productivity, and that frustrated a lot of end-users. Systems could be slow due to firewall rules that were misconfigured or outdated. FireMon enables you to efficiently manage your network and your firewalls and their rules, and it prevents security breaches.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using FireMon is that automating certain tasks enables you to get them done properly. Those tasks include cleaning up and managing firewalls efficiently. It saves you time, costs, and resource usage, so that people don't have to manage as many mundane tasks. Those tasks can be shifted to a system like FireMon. Usage of FireMon enables you to concentrate on more important tasks, while the system alerts you on things that are not going properly.

I would rate its real-time compliance management at eight out of 10. I can provide more details after we actually deploy it in the cloud, because I've used certain other things in the cloud, in other places, but we've not deployed FireMon in the cloud. But on-prem, it is very effective and an eight out of 10 is good.

We haven't upgraded to the latest version. We're having discussions with FireMon at the moment. Most people are at home because of the pandemic and people have not had the chance to pursue it. About a week or two ago, we had a meeting with them, and a discussion with them not just on how to upgrade it, but also on how to fine-tune it with the new facilities and functionalities that have recently been created.

Our deployment is on-prem, for now. We hope to get to SaaS, because we just started moving things to the cloud. We will do it soon. We are planning ahead for that, but it's dependent on the pandemic exit procedures.

FireMon can also help automate firewall policy changes across large, multi-vendor enterprise environments, depending on how it's managed and how it's tuned. It requires knowledge to configure it to do that. We are hoping to implement that in the future, in hybrid, multi-cloud environments.

We use the Security Manager module. We use it to report and audit firewall changes. We also use it to track the hygiene of our firewalls in addition to the changes made to them. Since it normalizes the firewall config, we are able to do custom searches and make custom controls to build out those audits and reports, making sure that we are applying firewall rules correctly. There are a lot of built-in reports as well, which help us to identify rules and objects that are being used. 

We are an enterprise environment. We are definitely not the largest of FireMon's customers, deployment-wise. 

FireMon automatically warns us when new firewall rules, and changes to existing ones, violate compliance policies before they are deployed. We find this valuable as well, especially from the compliance standards where it has real-time change detection and FireMon watches the firewalls. Whenever there is a change that breaks compliance, we get that immediately. At the same time, whenever you are planning a change inside FireMon, it won't let you make that change when there is a compliance issue that they found.

We have built-in change reporting in Security Manager, which is very helpful. Whenever we have a scheduled change report, we use that as an opportunity to review the report and do a technical review of the changes that were made.

It does a search whenever you are planning a rule in FireMon. So, if the traffic that you are trying to create a rule for is already allowed, FireMon will tell you. This will save you the time of trying to create a duplicate rule if you already have a rule that would allow the traffic.

The change normalization is the most valuable feature. It gives us the ability to just do a search based on time, device, or even device groups. It just shows us one by one what the changes to the config were and what time they were. It even shows which admins made the changes. The individual changes can be searched. You can create reports of the changes. That is probably the most valuable feature that we have.

Cleanup of rules is a huge pro of FireMon. After a change detection, the firewall hygiene is our number two most important feature that we use FireMon for. Right out the gate, they have built-in features and reports that will allow you to go through your firewall and identify objects that are not used in config. They have a report that is called removable rules, which is extremely helpful and very powerful. It goes through your firewall and identifies rules that are unlikely to be hit, either because the rules are set up wrong for your routing or they are completely shadowed, meaning that the rule will never have any impact on traffic going through the firewall. Those are both very powerful built-in reports that we do use extensively. 

The firewall config is normalized in FireMon to do custom searches, so you can search off of any number of things. You can search off of rule names. You can search off of the different addresses that would be inside that rule. You can also search based off of services that are allowed or disallowed by the rule. Therefore, it lets you search any number of firewall types in the same search syntax. You could have an ASA and Juniper, then in FireMon, you can do a search that will return rules from both devices. So, it is very powerful. 

We can create custom controls based on the hygiene. Whenever we have rules that are tagged as temporary, we have custom hygiene controls that will go through and help us make sure those are cleaned up after we are done using them.

The quality of our reports has improved drastically. These are reports that we can use internally from a technical standpoint, we can send up to our own management, or we can even use some of them externally for different auditors or other requirements that we have.

In most firewalls that you use, you have a comment field where you can put a change request ID and a little information about the rule. FireMon scales that up to 10. Within FireMon rules, you have fields for ticket ID. You have fields for the rule owner: the admin who created the rule, the security guy who approved the rule, and the business request, e.g., someone from IP systems or if it is a developer. Therefore, it has very verbose rule documentation inside of FireMon. Those are all searchable as well. 

While I like the reporting, I think that has the biggest room for improvement. Right now, as a user of FireMon, if I create a report, I am the only one who can see it inside FireMon. If someone on my team creates a report, they are the only person who can see that report on FireMon. It doesn't matter if you're admin in FireMon or not. The way we have to do it now is that we have created a service account user and that service account user runs all the reports. This way, all the reports, which are running, are just run under a single user so we can always access them. This definitely needs to change so users can see other users' reports or we can share reports within FireMon.

FireMon could improve their support for individual vendors. There are features that are specific to Cisco Firewalls that are not supported in FireMon. That changes a lot because they do release updates pretty regularly. However, if you are using Check Point, and that is what you use as your firewall, and you don't use Cisco Firewalls, then all the features for Cisco just aren't really worth it to you. So, FireMon could improve by making sure that they have full coverage for all the vendor specific uses.

We have been using FireMon for about a year.

The stability is favorable. We have been running it for a year. We have been able to restore from a backup. We did that as an exercise and that process was very straightforward.

They have built-in monitoring that sends out alerts whenever the CPU or disc usage triggers the thresholds, which are set at intelligent levels.

I have heard from the people at FireMon: When going from version 8 to version 9, that upgrade path was a little bit dicey in terms of stability. Since we installed version 9, I feel like we have been pretty good this whole time on stability.

I have good things to say about scalability. They do have multiple ways of deploying it. If you are a very small company, you can have everything FireMon on one appliance, which is kind of cool. As you need to scale, you can add resources to the database and application servers. You can also add data collectors throughout your environment, which is the biggest thing. The data collectors are machines that retrieve the firewall configuration and receive firewalls usage logs.

Scalability is good. The appliances themselves are massive. We're not the largest of FireMon's customers, but as we grow, the amount of compute resources just in general that FireMon is going to be using will be huge as we grow. So, it is scalable. The architecture makes it scalable, but they are beefy, i.e., In terms of compute resources that these appliances use, just the specs on them.

We do have plans to increase usage, if pricing and resources permit. Right now, we have all our firewalls reporting in FireMon. We also have our network topology loaded in FireMon.

We have worked with them a good deal. I would give them a solid 9 out of 10. The way that they can do a 10 is just by continuing to do what they do. This year has been pretty good, and we have had several dozen cases open with them. Each one of them has been pretty good. There were a couple that could have been resolved maybe a little faster.

Their management and all the techs with whom we have worked have been very helpful. We did have a couple of calls with their team lead.

Their support is US time zone-based. So, they have people who work well with the people at my company. Their support is native English speakers, so they are very easy to understand.

On the whole, their technical knowledge is pretty good. The documentation is a little bit spotty. Sometimes documentation around a specific issue is not full, but the people on a call are able to explain what is going on, what specific logs are, or what could be causing a specific issue. Therefore, the knowledge of their technical people is high.

They are open to video conferencing. So, if you want to manage your entire case through email or through a written format, you can do that. However, a lot of times it is faster just to do a screen-sharing and do a phone call to explain your issue. They have been open to doing that.

The way to move from 9 to 10: They will point you to their professional services, if they feel like your request is outside the scope of their support. They are a little quick to do that sometimes.

FireMon identifies risks in our environment and helps to prioritize fixes. This has been a good usage. When we first got FireMon, we built out several custom reports, as well as the built-in reports, which have helped us tighten our security rules. FireMon has helped us improve 2000 rules in the span of three months. These were rules that presented a risk to our organization before we had the project with FireMon to fix those rules.

We are spending about the same amount of time creating new reports as we did with our old reporting processes. However, the new compliance reports that we are turning out are across the board better, e.g., we are getting full change histories. We are getting when you have a control that does not allow a risky service out to the Internet. For example, it automatically goes through the rule base and then distills that report for you, rather than cherry-picking like we did on our old processes. These reports are more accurate and much better.

We used a competing vendor before we bought FireMon. During our purchase phase, when we were looking to replace that vendor, we also did evaluations of two other alternatives as well.

The primary reason that we switched to FireMon from our previous firewall administration platform was that there were bugs in it specific to the firewalls that we were using. This made things, like change detection and their version of compliance controls, unworkable so there was inaccurate reporting.

The secondary reason that we switched to FireMon was the previous solution's support. The support of the people, whom we were using before FireMon, was absolutely terrible. 

It took two weeks before we were completely deployed. The actual project took three months, but most of that was knowledge transfer and advanced concepts.

Because FireMon is pretty expensive, our initial purchase was only one module of FireMon, which was Security Manager. We do have licenses for all our firewalls, but we only had the one module, Security Manager, and not the other ones, like Policy Planner and Policy Optimizer. That was our initial implementation setup.

When we purchased FireMon, bundled in our purchase was professional services. So, we got to work with them during the initial implementation, and it was very straightforward and simple to set up. The people who we worked with were knowledgeable and helpful. They shot us the documentation well in advance so we could follow along with that step by step.

We have absolutely seen ROI. We are not tying ROI to automation, time saved, nor reduced headcount. Our return on investment has been primarily in the projects that we are able to accomplish with FireMon. For example, last quarter, our team completed 23 projects with FireMon, and they were each tied to a future-oriented process. For all the projects that my team accomplished, we created FireMon controls and reports as well as a cleanup on the firewalls. We also created automation around the FireMon API so these processes and reports are happening automatically in terms of scheduled reporting and automatic ticket requests into our ticket management system. FireMon's return on investment is due to the massive improvements that we have made on firewall management and firewall hygiene.

FireMon decreases errors and misconfigurations by 10% that increase risk in our environment. That has to do a lot with the change reporting that is in place, but also with the built-in controls and custom controls that we have made. Those all decrease the errors that people naturally make on a day-to-day basis for firewall administration.

On an average day, we receive a lot of requests to approve firewall changes, changes to the firewall, and additions to rules. On any given day, we have a request that was not given to us well, e.g., where they have different IPs that are needed or they don't give the right service request. Whenever FireMon gives us a report, we are able to go back through it and correct those changes to make them more accurate.

Whenever we are getting a request where the traffic could hit multiple firewalls, FireMon fact checks us to make sure we are putting the rule in the correct firewall.

FireMon is very expensive. I think that they charge a premium. In general, they are very pricey. Compared to their competitors, they cost a little more than the other solutions that we evaluated.

They license per module. They have four main modules that they license currently. The base license is included with the Security Manager module, which was our initial purchase back a year ago. 

The professional services is an add-on, and it is one where you can purchase more professional services. It is per project. So, it is an add-on for your initial implementation project. At a later time, if you have another project that you would want professional services on, they will quote you for that. 

The support comes in tiers and it's also per module. I don't know of anyone who would purchase a license for a module and not purchase the support that comes with it. 

We evaluated both Tufin and AlgoSec, as competitors of FireMon. FireMon differentiated itself because it was more fully featured on the firewalls that we were deploying.

My primary advice is take advantage of professional services whenever you are doing the initial implementation. The second piece of advice is just to adopt the tool. We could have purchased FireMon, set it up, and not done anything with it. Then, we would not have gotten our return on investment. By choosing to adopt the tool and creating projects and processes around it, we have our money's worth out of the tool.

If rule hygiene and policy management are a priority, you just have to make the time for it, in terms of setting aside time during the day that you are able to implement proactive changes and being able to measure those times for management. Anyone who does say that it's a priority for them knows that good policy management pays off in the end. Because down the road, you will be spending less time with a cleaner rule base.

We do not currently use it for automatic rule deployments, but that is a feature that is available and we have tested it. From my perspective, that is a feature which provides value.

We don't automatically deploy rules with FireMon, but I do know that is a feature and we have tested it.

We don't use FireMon to automatically make changes on our firewalls.

I would rate it as a nine out of 10. It has been very good. In terms of our use cases, it has met them very well. To move that up to a 10, changes to its reporting features would definitely make this product a lot better. Also, increasing the vendor specific features coverage and making sure that they are normalizing every aspect of each type of firewall.

Our main use case is the monitoring of changes on our firewalls. Another of our use cases is keeping firewall rules in good shape by doing regular rule reviews, using FireMon's built-in categories for rules and even deploying our own. Additionally, we used FireMon when we did internal firewall migration, meaning we were switching to a new generation of firewalls.

The solution has decreased errors and misconfigurations that would otherwise increase risk in our environment.

In addition, when we migrated to a new generation of firewalls, FireMon was of help when doing a first benchmark of the new solution and the initial setup.

It also identifies risks in our environment and helps prioritize fixes for them. The compliance module in Security Manager does that by watching overall rules and any changes, and benchmarking them against a pre-setup set of controls. It notifies us if any control has failed. That's how we monitor whether our firewall rules are compliant with a pre-set benchmark.

Firewall policy rule cleanup doesn't need to be a priority for a company to justify using FireMon, given that it makes that job much easier and faster. That means you don't need to allocate as many resources to do that work. It's now incomparably easier to do things like a rule review.

Overall, our monitoring and compliance are on much higher levels. The visibility we have into our firewall rules is much better now than it was prior to having FireMon.

One of the most valuable features is the compliance feature, which is something that we really utilize in Security Manager. It has a set of controls that we tuned a little bit from the way they came out-of-the-box, and created a custom set of rules that we are monitoring and that we want to have inline in our environment. It's a very good solution for real-time compliance management.

And for the cleanup of firewall rules, it performs really well for us. We utilize it in our regular rule cleanup tasks, several times a year. FireMon is our primary tool when doing that, either by going through its out-of-the-box compliance rules or using it to search for certain things in our rules that we want to prune from our firewalls.

When it comes to real-time compliance management, something that is missing is alerting on certain, predefined controls. It would be good to have a predefined set of controls which, if not complied with in a newly set up rule, would create an alert for us. That is something that is missing, out-of-the-box. We have tried to work around it by setting up email notifications, but it would be nice if it came with the product. That would really turn it into real-time monitoring for us. 

The workaround works for us, and the out-of-the-box setup is also good, but it expects you to be constantly watching and monitoring the solution itself. That's a bit hard when you have more than one solution to work on. You cannot just watch one and keep an eye on it for something that's non-compliant. Having an alert would be much easier for us. Still, it's a good tool for that kind of monitoring, for us.

I have been using FireMon for about two years.

FireMon is quite stable. We haven't had any stability issues with it so far.

It's quite scalable. The process of adding modules has gone quite well. Anytime we have needed to increase it, there hasn't been a problem.

We use it extensively; if not on a daily basis then on a weekly basis. There are periods when we use it even more intensely when doing reviews.

They really give us great support. When thinking of the level of support that we get from some other vendors, FireMon's support is really good. They have a good, knowledgeable support team around the world. We have offices in Europe and California. Whenever we have had any type of issue and have needed their support, whether the issue is in Europe or California, we have had really great support from them.

We did not have a previous solution.

We had a FireMon support engineer for the initial setup and it looked fairly straightforward, but it definitely needed some FireMon knowledge. Since then, we have onboarded a number of new devices in FireMon on our own, and that part is quite straightforward. But setting up the system itself is something that requires the knowledge of a FireMon engineer.

For the deployment, there was a month of weekly sessions with the engineer to get it working.

We have three people, within our security staff, who are using FireMon regularly. The three of us were involved in deploying and we work on maintaining it. It's a shared effort. None of us is working full-time on FireMon.

There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We talked about other solutions with different partners, and based on that we decided to go with FireMon. We did have a proof of concept with them before going live, and we liked it and the options it had, so we decided to go forward.

We have a single server and we're a small group. We use FireMon to track all of our firewall rule changes.

The security section lets you see where your unused rules are and it lets us go in there, optimize it, and make the firewall more secure.

FireMon saves us a lot of time and it's nice because if you're adding a rule that's similar to another rule, it'll tell you so sometimes you can just edit the one and add another source or destination in there without creating a duplicate rule. It enables us to consolidate and have fewer, more meaningful rules. We're saving around 30% of our time.

I like the dashboard for the security section of it. It helps you identify the higher risk rules on your firewall so you can mitigate the ones that you were not aware of.

When it comes to real-time compliance management, we can use it to push out rules. We do that manually. But it's a great thing to be able to track and do everything because we were doing all that manually in the past and trying to go back and find something that we had done in the past the manual way was not working well.

FireMon decreased errors and misconfigurations that increased risk in our environment.

It also helped us to identify risks in our environment and helped to prioritize fixes. It does that through the security dashboard. It lists recommendations, zero-hit rules, and things that you just have out there that aren't being used.

It's been great for our security posture. Every hole we button-up is one less out there.

It comes as a Linux appliance on a server and we're not a Linux shop, we're more of a Windows shop. It would be great if they could automate or integrate the backups into it and other things through their GUI interface, just to make the management of Linux a little more transparent.

I have been using FireMon for two to three years. 

The stability has been great. We have not had any problems whatsoever. It's very reliable and always available.

We're a small shop. We have everything on a single server, but I know you can put it across multiple servers for larger organizations. We're just not one of them.

There is one network engineer who uses it. But we have about a dozen people on there all together who are system admins that add rules.

We have our main site and a remote site, so it's two firewalls.

It's at 100% of the implementation.

Technical support has been very good. They always answer my questions. They'll stay on with you until they resolve the issue.

FireMon is a totally new implementation. We previously did everything manually.

We chose FireMon because it was recommended to us by the auditors and it was time to automate it as much as we could.

The initial setup was straightforward. We sat back and they installed it for the most part.

I don't remember anything bad about our FireMon consultant so I'm sure everything went smooth. We set up the servers, they set up a backup server and they had everything working when we got off the phone. They also had some additional training online for me, which I found helpful.

Our ROI is that it saves time and helps us improve security. 

Other than the initial purchase, we just put in for the renewals every year and somebody else worries about budgeting and everything. 

We haven't been using it for compliance at this point. The auditors use a different application for compliance. So we've been running that to check with security compliance.

I would rate FireMon a ten out of ten. 

The most valuable feature is the Firewall reviews for our company compliance.

The review process is an area that needs improvement. We would like to review the rules and be able to make comments.

The advanced features are complex in setting up the rules.

I would like to see level mapping available with other products improved, to allow other products to build the level mapping. It does not have an export in Visio.

I have been working with FireMon for half a year.

We are using version 8.

This solution is stable.

It's a scalable product. We have five to eight people who are using this solution in our company.

Technical support is fine. I don't have any other issues.

I have not worked with any product that is similar previously.

Most of the setup was easy for us, but the advanced features are more complex.

Pricing is reasonable.

Licensing fees are paid every year.

It's a good solution that is stable, I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate FireMon an eight out of ten.

We are resellers. All of our clients are enterprise companies. 

The firewall assessment feature is great.

FireMon could be easier to use and flexibility regarding reporting could be improved. 

I have been using FireMon for six months.

FireMon is both scalable and stable. 

I've never had to contact technical support. 

I used to work with AlgoSec. They are both very good products but they target different customers in our market. One is more expensive than the other. One is more simple than the other to use. For this reason, we decided to go with FireMon. The profile of our customers is more related to FireMon than AlgoSec.

The initial setup was very easy.

FireMon is cheaper than AlgoSec.

My advice is to make sure you choose the right reseller because it's not a product you should use by itself.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give FireMon a rating of eight. 

FireMon is nice and provides 360-degree user views. You can also find the information you're looking for pretty easily.

I don't like that it comes with bugs, constant issues, and limited functionality. I would like to have enhanced change management reporting support for UTM features in the next release.

I have been using FireMon for six months.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give FireMon a five.

We act as a business partner for our clients. We're implementors. Each client has a different use case. 

The solution is very stable. We haven't found there are any issues with its reliability.

The product scales well. You can really expand it if you need to.

This product is very simple to use. In that sense, it's one of the best on the market.

The technical support is very good. They've always been helpful.

I personally have started using it recently, therefore it's hard to pinpoint if anything is lacking. I need more time with the product.

The cost of the solution is pretty expensive. It would be ideal if they could work on their pricing.

My company has been using the solution for around five years or so. It's been a while at this point.

The solution is very stable. We've found it to be reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's not buggy or glitchy.

If a company needs to expand the solution they can. The product is very scalable. We've been satisfied with it.

We've currently applied for 20 users.

We occasionally need the assistance of technical support. We've always found them to be helpful and responsive. We're satisfied with the level of support we get.

The installation is pretty straightforward. It didn't take much time to install. It will take around 10 days of time to install in an environment similar to ours.

We have 30 people that deploy the solution to different organizations.

We're the deployment team. We implement this solution for clients.

The solution is expensive. It's not the cheapest option.

We've pre-paid for the license. We don't have to pay for it on a monthly basis.

We're using the latest version of the solution currently. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. I've been very happy with the product overall. 

I'd recommend the solution as it's so easy to use. Clients are very happy with it.

The primary use case is optimizing firewall rules.

The firewall administrators have gained time back by using this tool, simplifying the firewall rule set. The solution helps to clean up rules which have not been reviewed in several years.

It gives us the ability to go to one place to look for potential firewall rules that are inappropriate, or which don't meet compliance. Instead of manually searching hundreds of firewalls for a policy, we can go to this one location and find the rules which are now out of compliance.

The policy overview is the most valuable feature for each of the firewalls that we manage right now, as it reduces the complexity of the firewall rule set.

The AWS integration is still not mature for us to use. It is just not ready for our use case for AWS connectivity. Therefore, it does not provide us with a single pane of glass for our cloud environments, because we can't manage our cloud environment with the tool.

The map needs improvement in our network. The tool should be able to map out the path of flow from one firewall through our network. However, it does not understand our routing environment, so it cannot do that for us.

We would like it if this solution could provided us with end-to-end change automation for the entire rule lifecycle, but the map feature cannot support our environment, for now.

It is stable, which is acceptable. I don't have any negatives with it. This is not a concern of mine, as we don't have any issues with stability.

We have probably one full-time equivalent managing the tool right now. Our ultimate end goal, that I am envisioning, is that we would need more support to manage the tool.

All the vendors in this space seem to overpromise and underdeliver on scalability. They all claim they scale the best, but none of them really do. This is an area that could be improved. It is the same with high availability. High availability for geographic separation is also an area that could be improved.

Right now, at this stage, only our firewall admins are using it. This is a team of about 20.

The technical support has been very responsive. They have helped us with all of the issues that we have encountered.

We didn't use a previous solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. The wizard was easy to use. So, the initial installation of the tool was easy. However, when you get back into configuring the details for the map to obtain that single pane of glass view for the entire network, it was not well thought out and it could use improvement.

I would still consider us in an early phase of deployment, even though we've been using it for two years. We don't have all the firewalls licensed, so they are not all being managed by the tool. I would say we're still not done deploying it. We're still waiting on features to be developed by FireMon, so we can use it in our environment.

Our implementation strategy was to license the high value firewalls first, trying to start getting them managed by the tool, then we were hoping to do an initial pilot for firewall rule change management. However, we were never able to get to that step because the tool can't manage our network, or doesn't understand our network.

We used FireMon Professional Services.

We have not met a return on investment with this tool yet.

For the firewalls that we manage, it does help reduce our overall audit time.

We don't license all of the devices in our network, so it does not provide us with a comprehensive visibility of all devices in a hybrid network at this time.

I'm not involved in our licensing costs, but I do know that FireMon has a wide variety of different licensing options.

During our proof of concept phase, we also evaluated Tufin, AlgoSec, and Skybox. We chose FireMon based on a few different things, but the main one was that they were a US-based vendor and the others were Israeli.

Each deployment scenario will be unique. A robust proof of concept is key to make sure it will meet all of your intended use cases.

The solution is managing 25 percent of our firewalls right now. We probably won't increase usage until we can get the required features for firewall change rule management to work correctly. We probably will not increase usage until that works.

I would rate it as a six (out of ten). We need the end-to-end mapping feature working to make it a ten. That is just our next phase. I don't know what other problems that we will run into. There is a lot to deploy before we can give all the details of what we need to make it a ten. There is integration with ServiceNow and some of our other tools. We have to make sure all that is working before we could give it a ten.

The primary use case is for compliance and monitoring of firewall changes. This solution allows us to secure our firewalls.

It is the single place where we go to review all of our firewall changes. The solution makes it easier for us to track all the changes made. It is a central place where we can look at all the firewall rules, because we have three different firewall vendors. It saves us time and creates efficiencies by looking at the general picture. 

This solution has helped to clean up rules that had not been reviewed in several years. It is used for all of our firewall changes. At the moment, we are not looking to do more than use it for that.

This solution has helped to reduce our overall audit time. We are under PCI, so it was a requirement. We had to do something like this, and it just made it easier. The solution was prebuilt to do that, and we didn't have to build our own spreadsheet.

The most valuable feature is being able to review all the firewall changes in the Policy Planner, and then in the policy review feature.

This solution provide us with comprehensive visibility of all our devices in a hybrid network.

It is fairly straightforward to use.

We had a few minor issues with it. However, it's worked pretty well for us overall.

The stability has been fairly decent, but there have been a few issues. My coworker has had some issues in the past where he has had to work with support.

It seems fairly scalable.

There are not a whole lot of users. It is mainly just my team. Every once in a while, one of my users will submit a request for it, but that doesn't happen very often. It is primarily just my team.

From what I have heard, the technical support is fairly good. However, I have not used them in a few years.

I didn't really have another solution that I was using before it.

We had it when I started here five years ago.

We had another guy who primarily worked on the setup because he actually used to work at FireMon. So, I haven't really done the setup on it in quite a few years.

The deployment was fairly straightforward.

We did the implementation in-house.

We have one guy, who previously worked for FireMon, managing the solution right now. 

We pay for it yearly.

We might have looked at Tufin.

It is fairly straightforward to use, and I haven't really had a whole lot of issues with it.

This solution provide us with end-to-end change automation for the entire rule lifecycle of firewalls. It does it from the request, then all the way through the approval cycle.

We really haven't done much with this solution’s cloud support automation for public cloud platforms. We are just doing on-premise.