Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls
-
Comparing a Barracuda F18 vs Meraki MX84 for an upcoming project.
We've been replacing all client Cisco ASAs with Barracuda F18s this last year. Their price for features is really enticing.
I've dropped in and configured a lot of Meraki gear in the past (various switches and WAPs), except firewalls. Expensive, and a never ending licensing model. Clients are perfectly fine with that.
I have a highly scalable client that I've been assessing Meraki with Barracuda. Long term goals will likely be cloud systems, but for the next few years everything is on premises. This is also a client that will pay a lot more for better support/features/hardware/automation/etc.
The reason for Meraki is central management. This client is spread across many states. I've been fortunate in the past to see their MSP setup; it's amazing and I might like to get back to it.
My question is this... Anyone actually implemented both Barracuda and Meraki, and found any "gotchas" from either, aside from cost or never-ending licensing (lapsing causes loss of functionality)?
-
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
Comparing a Barracuda F18 vs Meraki MX84 for an upcoming project.
Neither is good. Meraki is insanely overpriced and underpowered, but not bad otherwise. Barracuda is famously insecure and should never, ever be used ever.
-
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
We've been replacing all client Cisco ASAs with Barracuda F18s this last year. Their price for features is really enticing.
What price is enticing? As I'd consider them not even remotely on par with Ubiquiti security at $45, unless they are around $2 a unit, what makes an insecure useless device with a wide open back door and a company that doesn't believe in security behind it enticing?
-
I have only briefly worked with the Meraki MX line of firewalls. I do not like them. They seemed to do well for most things, but the interface is bad, and there are some oddities that I don't like with them.
-
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
I've dropped in and configured a lot of Meraki gear in the past (various switches and WAPs), except firewalls. Expensive, and a never ending licensing model. Clients are perfectly fine with that.
We've got clients who love them. But basically they are only clients that don't run the financials to realize how much they are losing.
-
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
My question is this... Anyone actually implemented both Barracuda and Meraki, and found any "gotchas" from either, aside from cost or never-ending licensing (lapsing causes loss of functionality)?
If they are willing to pay for really good stuff, why look at these? Meraki is SO underpowered.
Why not good stuff like Palo Alto if they have the funds and want to spend them?
-
@dafyre said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
I have only briefly worked with the Meraki MX line of firewalls. I do not like them. They seemed to do well for most things, but the interface is bad, and there are some oddities that I don't like with them.
We universally replace them with Ubiquiti. better performance, easier to maintain, more features.
-
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
The reason for Meraki is central management. This client is spread across many states. I've been fortunate in the past to see their MSP setup; it's amazing and I might like to get back to it.
That's not a reason. Ubiquiti already has that. Meraki doesn't offer anything special there.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
The reason for Meraki is central management. This client is spread across many states. I've been fortunate in the past to see their MSP setup; it's amazing and I might like to get back to it.
That's not a reason. Ubiquiti already has that. Meraki doesn't offer anything special there.
UNMS right?
-
@dustinb3403 said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@scottalanmiller said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
The reason for Meraki is central management. This client is spread across many states. I've been fortunate in the past to see their MSP setup; it's amazing and I might like to get back to it.
That's not a reason. Ubiquiti already has that. Meraki doesn't offer anything special there.
UNMS right?
Yes.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
We've been replacing all client Cisco ASAs with Barracuda F18s this last year. Their price for features is really enticing.
What price is enticing? As I'd consider them not even remotely on par with Ubiquiti security at $45, unless they are around $2 a unit, what makes an insecure useless device with a wide open back door and a company that doesn't believe in security behind it enticing?
You are not comparing the same things. So just stop.
I totally agree with never using Barracuda though because of their poor security history.
-
I wonder what their announcement is about.
-
@dustinb3403 Ubiquiti in SPAAAAACE
-
@momurda said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@dustinb3403 Ubiquiti in SPAAAAACE
Or they forgot a guy was floating around their satellites and just wanted to announce they left a person up there to die. . .
-
@dustinb3403 said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@scottalanmiller said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
The reason for Meraki is central management. This client is spread across many states. I've been fortunate in the past to see their MSP setup; it's amazing and I might like to get back to it.
That's not a reason. Ubiquiti already has that. Meraki doesn't offer anything special there.
UNMS right?
Yup, might not be quite as full features as the Meraki option, but it is free and private and works very well and since it offers terminal access now, it can do anything.
-
@jaredbusch said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@scottalanmiller said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@bbigford said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
We've been replacing all client Cisco ASAs with Barracuda F18s this last year. Their price for features is really enticing.
What price is enticing? As I'd consider them not even remotely on par with Ubiquiti security at $45, unless they are around $2 a unit, what makes an insecure useless device with a wide open back door and a company that doesn't believe in security behind it enticing?
You are not comparing the same things. So just stop.
I totally agree with never using Barracuda though because of their poor security history.
They don't have to be the same things. One is good and adds security. One is crap and makes you insecure. If the goal is security, that one claims to be a joke of a UTM and the other just a solid secure firewall, doesn't really matter.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
I wonder what their announcement is about.
Where did you get that image, because the UNMS Alpha group is not talking about version 14 yet.
-
@jaredbusch said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@dustinb3403 said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
I wonder what their announcement is about.
Where did you get that image, because the UNMS Alpha group is not talking about version 14 yet.
Right on their website. . . unms.com
-
@dustinb3403 said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@jaredbusch said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
@dustinb3403 said in Barracuda vs Meraki - firewalls:
I wonder what their announcement is about.
Where did you get that image, because the UNMS Alpha group is not talking about version 14 yet.
Right on their website. . . unms.com
I have never once went there, always unms.ubnt.com
-
Ah, I see it way down on the bottom..
