We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Huawei NGFW Competitors and Alternatives

Get our free report covering Fortinet, Cisco, Cisco, and other competitors of Huawei NGFW. Updated: November 2021.
552,305 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Huawei NGFW competitors and alternatives

Mitku Bitew
Network Administration Section Head at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Provides role-based access, helps in securing our environment, and is easy to use

Pros and Cons

  • "The remote access, VPN, and ACL features are valuable. We are using role-based access for individuals."
  • "Other products are becoming easier to access and configure. They are providing UI interfaces to configure, take backup, synchronize redundant machines, and so on. It is very easy to take backup and upgrade the images in those products. Cisco ASA should have such features. If one redundant machine is getting upgraded, the technology and support should be there to upgrade other redundant machines. In a single window, we should be able to do more in terms of backups, restores, and upgrades."

What is our primary use case?

We are using it as a firewall for our data center and headquarter. We are also using it for DR. We are using Cisco ASA 5500 Series.

How has it helped my organization?

It is a security device, and it is useful for securing our environment. It provides role-based access and other features and helps us in easily securing our environment.

It provides visibility. It has been helpful for packet inspection and logging activities for all kinds of packets, such as routing packets, denied packets, and permitted packets. All these activities are visible on Cisco ASA. There are different commands for logging and visibility.

We use Cisco ASA for the integration of the network. Our company is a financial company, and we are integrating different organizations and banks by using Cisco ASA. We are using role-based access. Any integration, any access, or any configuration is role-based. 

What is most valuable?

The remote access, VPN, and ACL features are valuable. We are using role-based access for individuals.

IPS is also valuable for intrusion detection and prevention. It is a paid module that can be added. I'm using it for security, VLAN management, segregation management, and so on.

It is easy to use. In our region and our country, Cisco is well known, and most of the companies are using Cisco products. We have been using Cisco devices for a while, and our company primarily has Cisco devices. So, we are familiar with it, which makes it very easy to use for us. Even when we compare it with other products, it is easier to use.

It is easy for us to manage it because it is a familiar product, and it has been a part of our environment. Now, other products are providing free training, free access, and free license, because of which things are changing. So, you can easily become familiar with other products.

What needs improvement?

Its licensing cost and payment model can be improved. Cisco doesn't provide training and certification for engineers without payments. Other companies, such as Huawei, provide the training for free. Their subscription and licenses are also free and flexible. Other products are breaking the market by providing such features. 

It doesn't support all standard interfaces. It is also not suitable for big companies with high bandwidth traffic. Its capacity should be improved.

Other products are becoming easier to access and configure. They are providing UI interfaces to configure, take backup, synchronize redundant machines, and so on. It is very easy to take backup and upgrade the images in those products. Cisco ASA should have such features. If one redundant machine is getting upgraded, the technology and support should be there to upgrade other redundant machines. In a single window, we should be able to do more in terms of backups, restores, and upgrades.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution for almost eight years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable. It needs to be configured based on the standards and functionality. We have one device that has been working for more than 10 years, which indicates it is stable, but it requires licenses to upgrade features.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It doesn't have an expansion card. So, it may not scalable for huge buildings. It also lacks a lot of standard interfaces. Other products are providing capacity for a data center. Other technologies are expanding their interface bandwidth from 10 gigs. In my opinion, Cisco ASA doesn't have this capability.

How are customer service and support?

Their support is very good. We have a support license, so their support is very good. They are tracing us and following up with us to solve the problem on time.

How was the initial setup?

Its setup is easy. We are familiar with Cisco ASA and other Cisco products, and they are easy to configure. A lot of resources are available on the internet, so it is easy to set up for anyone with basic training. It is easy in different types of environments, such as universities and colleges.

It generally doesn't take more than a day, but it also depends on the size of the organization. If an organization is very big and if you need a line-by-line configuration for access role and VPN, it can take a bit more time.

Cisco is constantly upgrading and providing features based on current requests. We usually plan deployments at the end of the year and at the beginning of the year. Everyone plans for new products, new configurations, and new expansions based on that.

What was our ROI?

Any security product provides a return on investment. Any gap in security may cost an organization more.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is expensive. There is a cost for everything. There is per year license cost and support cost. There is also a cost for any training, any application, and any resource. Things are very costly to do with Cisco.

Other brands are cheaper. They are also more flexible in terms of training, subscription, and licensing. They give lots and lots of years free. They provide more than Cisco.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise understanding its features, advantages, and disadvantages as compared to other solutions. It is simple, but its cost is a negative point. 

I would rate Cisco ASA Firewall an eight out of 10.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Faris Khan
Support Engineer at Techaccess Pakistan
Real User
Top 20
User friendly and easy to deploy but doesn't have next-generation firewall capabilities

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is good for a basic firewall for a small business or for home use."
  • "The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale."

What is our primary use case?

The solution is primarily used as a basic firewall. I'm running my WiFi through it.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very user-friendly.

It's easy to manage and deploy.

The solution is good for a basic firewall for a small business or for home use.

What needs improvement?

The solution can't compete with next-generation firewalls.

The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for a year or two.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There are issues with the VPN availability, but overall, the is a pretty smooth connection.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have two people running the solution and another 50 to 80 people using the solution, so we have a relatively small setup.

The solution is scalable and can be deployed to multiple VMs.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've never reached out to technical support. If I run into problems, I tend to Google queries in order to find solutions.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I was not at the company when they had a different solution, so I am unsure as to what it was.

Currently, I'm looking for another firewall and I am working on upgrading. We may use an Ignition firewall in the near future.

I've also deployed a couple of different firewalls in the past, including Huawei.

How was the initial setup?

The solution wasn't too complex, but the VPN setup isn't so reliable. It sometimes misbehaves or malfunctions or breaks down automatically. Occasionally it disconnects and you can't transfer the data from it.

Deployment took about a day or so. It takes maybe five or six hours to get everything up and running.

Since it's a simple firewall, anyone who has basic firewall knowledge can run and maintain it.

What about the implementation team?

I had some help internally from our network team when I was implementing the solution. However, I did not need outside assistance from a consultant or integrator.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We are using a free version of the solution.

What other advice do I have?

I'm just a customer. I'm not a partner or reseller.

I'm not sure which version of the solution our organization is currently using. I understand that it is the most up-to-date version. I updated it two months ago.

The solution is good for a small business or home. I'm not sure what the paid version offers or if it has more security features that would be suitable for larger businesses. The version I'm using works well and is simple. It's more reliable than a router.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Kamlesh Ridhorkar
Sr. Solution Architect at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees
Reseller
Top 5
Good interface and dashboards with excellent application visibility

Pros and Cons

  • "The interface and dashboards are good."
  • "The pricing could be improved upon."

What is most valuable?

The solution has many great features. I don't know if there's one single one that stands above and beyond everything, however.

The application visibility is excellent. There is no other solution that does it quite as well. Palo Alto definitely has an edge in that sense.

The ability of the security features to adapt is also very good. They offer great DNS protection.

They include everything from a network point of view and a security perspective. For the most part, the endpoints are great.

The interface and dashboards are good.

What needs improvement?

The GSW needs some improvements right now.

The endpoints could use improvement. The solution is mostly a cloud solution now, and there are a lot of competing solutions that are playing in the space and may be doing things a bit better.

The pricing could be improved upon.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been dealing with the solution for the last four or five years at least.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the solution is good. It's quite reliable. I haven't experienced bugs or glitches that affect its performance. It doesn't crash.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

If you size everything appropriately, you shouldn't have any issues with scaling. It's quite good. Users can scale it up if they need to.

How are customer service and technical support?

I'd say that technical support is excellent. They are very helpful. We've quite satisfied with the level of support we got from the company.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I've never dealt with Huawei, however, our company has worked with Cisco, Dell, and HP among other solutions.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing of the solution is quite high. It's too expensive, considering there's so much competition in the space.

There aren't extra costs on top of the standard licensing policy. Still, Palo Alto seems to be adding some premium costs that competitors just don't have.

What other advice do I have?

While we mainly deal with on-premises deployment models, occasionally we also do hybrid deployments.

We're not a customer. We're a systems integrator. We're a reseller. We sell solutions to our clients.

Palo Alto is very good at policymaking. It's like they have a single policy that you can use. Other solutions don't have single policy use, which means you have to configure everything. There may be many consoles or many tasks that you'll have to worry about other solutions. Multiple task configuration should not be there, and yet, for many companies, it is. This isn't the case with Palo Alto. Palo Alto is easy compared to Fortinet. 

It's overall a very solid solution. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
PK
Senior Network Planning Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Scalable with an easy setup and good security

Pros and Cons

  • "The initial setup is pretty simple."
  • "Some people complain that the solution tends to have a steep learning curve. It could be because most people have basic familiarity with Cisco or other similar products and maybe have never worked closely with Juniper products."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution as a firewall for security purposes in order to keep our organization safe.

What is most valuable?

In general, the entire security solution is great, from end to end.

The initial setup is pretty simple.

What needs improvement?

The solution works quite well. I can't think of any features that are lacking. I don't know where it could be improved.

Some people complain that the solution tends to have a steep learning curve. It could be because most people have basic familiarity with Cisco or other similar products and maybe have never worked closely with Juniper products. I don't find that it's a problem, however, I have heard this mentioned as an issue for some people.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for a couple of years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. It doesn't have bugs or glitches and doesn't seem to crash at all. Its performance is great. You can rely on it.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can scale if you need it to. That's not a problem.

We do have plans to increase the usage of the product in the future.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have technical experts who have helped us in the past. They were quite supportive. They were both responsive and knowledgable and we've been satisfied with eh level of service provided.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Before we started using Juniper, we used Huawei Firewall and its related services. We switched as we found that Juniper offered a much better service. From our perspective, everything about Juniper is better. Huawei is lacking in a few areas.

How was the initial setup?

The solution isn't too complex to set up. It's pretty straightforward.

The deployment, from beginning to end, takes about six months.

We had about 20 experts on the deployment project.

What about the implementation team?

We used a solution provider to assist us with the implementation.

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with Juniper.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

We'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution an eight.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Get our free report covering Fortinet, Cisco, Cisco, and other competitors of Huawei NGFW. Updated: November 2021.
552,305 professionals have used our research since 2012.