Cisco ASA 5525-X Firewall Edition Security Appliance

Mfg.Part: ASA5525-K9 | CDW Part: 2635615 | UNSPSC: 43222501
Availability: In Stock
Was $10,225.02
$6,732.99 Advertised Price
Advertised Price
Lease Option ($203.47/month) Lease Price Information
Note: Leasing is available to businesses only. Leasing is not available to individuals.
Product Details
  • Security appliance
  • 8 ports
  • GigE
  • 1U
  • rack-mountable
View Full Product Details
Better Together
Cisco ASA 5525-X Firewall Edition Security Appliance
Quick View
Total Price:

Product Overview

Main Features
  • Security appliance
  • 8 ports
  • GigE
  • 1U
  • rack-mountable
Midsize businesses protecting the Internet edge require the same level of protection as large, enterprise networks. You require enterprise-strength security, but purchasing a firewall that was built to handle the performance needs and budget of a large enterprise would be unnecessary and a waste of company resources. You need a firewall that provides the performance you need at a price you can afford, without compromising security.

Cisco ASA 5500 series adaptive security appliance fits your network and budget while offering the same proven level of security that protects some of the largest networks at some of the most security-conscious companies in the world. The ASA 5500 series scales to meet the performance and security requirements of a wide range of network applications, to correspond with your changing needs.

The Cisco ASA 5525-X is midrange security appliance that uses the Cisco SecureX framework for a context-aware approach to security that delivers multiple security services, multigigabit performance, flexible interface options, and redundant power supplies. It is built on the same proven security platform as the rest of the ASA family of security appliances, and has been designed to deliver superior performance for exceptional operational efficiency.

Cisco ASA 5525-X Firewall Edition Security Appliance is rated 3.9 out of 5 by 51.
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Robust cyber-security features protects server infrastructure What is our primary use case?I have been using the Cisco ASA NGFW ( /products/cisco-asa-ngfw-reviews ) for about four months. Everything works fine right now. We have only been using this device for a very short period of time.* We have about 500 registered users and about 400-600 static users.* For 400 to 600 users with wireless devices, we use Cisco ASA NGFW ( /products/cisco-asa-ngfw-reviews ) to control device traffic. We're using the new web filters.* We use Cisco ASA NGFW as the bit application.Thus far, we are using it as a web filter to filter the data against incoming traffic. We are an educational organization, so there is no gambling allowed. We don't want to allow students access to gambling sites or adult sites, etc. We use lots of web filters. That's the primary reason I installed the Cisco firewall.We are also happy with the Cisco ASA NGFW router firewall. It protects your small server infrastructure, but it's not complete. We purchased the Cisco ASA NGFW for the web filter. That's why we moved to the firewall.How has it helped my organization?Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization.We have an opportunity to grow now. The Cisco ASA NGFW firewall can be upgraded to another version, so it's better for us long term. It is much better because we can control the traffic that students are accessing and downloading. There are still a lot of improvements that can be done.What is most valuable?For organization security, Cisco ASA NGFW has robust cyber-security features. We are planning to increase the number of firewalls installed, especially for wireless connections.What needs improvement?We installed a Cisco path a month ago. There was a new update for the Cisco firewall and there were security issues.We like Cisco filtering as a firewall, but in the current market, Cisco's passive firewall is not unique. We don't have any warranty problems with Cisco.I asked our carrier several times to provide the exact gap code for me, but there is no Cisco dealer in our region. There is also no software accessibility with Cisco ASA NGFW. You can't always access the product that way. I also tried pfSense ( /products/pfsense-reviews ).There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products.Cisco products are more supported by lots of companies who are producing technical services for cloud platforms. The certification is very easy in Georgia now. There are lots of people using Cisco in Georgia because their accessibility is better than the other products on the market. I also talked to several guys about the Barracuda firewall.The Barracuda firewall is very expensive. You need to pay three or four thousand dollars every three months, so it's very expensive for us. We are not a big company.For how long have I used the solution?Less than one year.What do I think about the stability of the solution?For our users, there are rules for the students and staff have another RF for authorization. There are small file servers also within the domain controller.There is no special restriction for the students. They can print. They can visit outside websites online, but there is no gambling allowed at other sites.The students can access whatever they want over email or HTTP. Only the gambling and the betting sites, they cannot install the software. There are restrictions.The students can use their own mobile phones or wireless devices, whatever they want. They are using the shared public key authorization. Our institution doesn't have any restrictions about accessing legal data. Except in Georgia, we have a very big problem with gambling websites. There are a lot of gambling websites, so we are trying to restrict all of the gambling sites at our company. We have a contract for the next year.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?We are growing. In the next two years, we will have an additional 600 users, so we will double the capacity. We will see even more in the next three years.It will be like very tough. In about five-year cycles, you need to update the firewall and add other new Cisco devices for the next generation of innovation.In five years, we will be ready for a complete upgrade cycle for everything. The stability and scalability of the Cisco ASA NGFW are good for when we need to grow.For the next five years, everything is fine. After that, we will see because there will be a lot of changes.How are customer service and technical support?Technical support with Cisco is very good. We feel the company is very reliable and very competent. I have very good feelings about the future for project operations.If you previously used a different solution, which one did you use and why did you switch?We had the old version of the Kerio firewall, but because in our country, there is no official dealer for Kerio, we moved to the Cisco ASA NGFW. This is the main reason why we moved to the Cisco firewall.How was the initial setup?We announced the tender and bought this product with the installation plus setup included in the price. I was not involved in the installation or in the setup.The company just asked a consultant to do it. The whole process, after we announced the tender, took about one to two weeks. The consultant company installed the software. They also helped us to optimize other parts of the network such as the routers and switches.The setup of the Cisco ASA NGFW was complex, not only for us as a firewall. We have now submitted another tender for a device router with two-node switchless support. We updated almost everything on the Cisco ASA NGFW with the core and distribution level software upgrades.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement.The Cisco license was not yearly. It was a yearly license for the firewall. For the router and switch, it was a lifetime license.Which other solutions did I evaluate?The other option we considered was Kerio. I tried to contact their office in Russia, but it is in the UK. I wanted to communicate with them because we cannot buy things without a warranty.We considered buying Kerio products with the warranty, but they said we needed to send the device to them to repair it. This meant it would take too much time to replace it. In Georgia, we need a local distributor, i.e. a local representative here who we can work with, so that's the problem.What other advice do I have?In Georgia, there is no problem using the Cisco firewall, because it's accessible. You cannot use other products, because they are not accessible. That's the whole problem.I would rate Cisco ASA NGFW an 8 out of 10.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-04-25
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Efficient at improving client operations and has excellent stability What is our primary use case?We use Cisco ASA with Firepower. Currently, we have been implementing the solution for around four years. Our company has been around for a long time, more than ten years. We cover the solutions for Network Direct Turbo ATM at the moment, it's a lot of the security work.How has it helped my organization?Cisco ASA is best at the technical part of the business, related to our selling and management services. We have to improve the technical functionality of the product as part of making an efficient service for the customer. We need to improve the customer's technical experience with Cisco ASA & Firepower.What is most valuable?There are two main ways that using Cisco ASA & Firepower has improved our organization:* Technical features* Our Sales teamWhat needs improvement?With Cisco ASA, we used the SMB of the model. The customers are usually satisfied, but I am going to recommend that all clients upgrade to Firepower management.For Cisco ASA Firepower, I want Cisco to improve the feature called anti-spam. We use a Cisco only email solution, that's why we need the anti-spam on email facility.For how long have I used the solution?Three to five years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. The performance is good. Compared to Fortinet on the watchband firewall, it is indispensable. Because of our customer experience as an integration company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have good performance from Cisco ASA.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?ASA is limited in terms of its scalability because of our customer environments. They are in the banking and microfinance sector. Our clients always want to move to the next generation firewall so they like FirePOWER. When we move clients to Firepower, they need to integrate with Sourcefire and move into more complicated management.We have the staff perform the migrations to Firepower. We redirected traffic with Sourcefire and also require the use of FMC by our management center with Firepower.How are customer service and technical support?I've been exploring the technical support for Cisco ASA. I haven't had any problems with it.How was the initial setup?The initial setup is straightforward.What other advice do I have?I always encourage our existing customers to move to the Cisco ASA Firepower version, i.e. the next generation Firepower like 2100, 4000, or 9300.I would rate Cisco ASA an eight out of ten. An eight and not a ten because some of the features are limited and some are awful. We had to install other solutions for security and had to spend a lot on other hardware. Other vendors like Fortinet or Palo Alto Networks focus more on offering complete solutions.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-04-17
Rated 4 out of 5 by from We can create a profile and can give access depending on the access level they need to be on What is our primary use case?We use remote desktop services from our data center. We can clean the client and the remote desktop server and from there we can establish a VPN channel.How has it helped my organization?We can create a profile and we can give them access depending on the access level they need to be on. All the way from level one to level 16. I just create the user and from the dropdown, I select what access level they need to be on and that's it. I don't need to go individually to each and every account and do the configuration.What is most valuable?I like the user interface because the navigation is very easy and straightforward. On the left side pane, you have all the sites that you need to browse. Unlike any other firewalls, it's pretty straightforward.What needs improvement?If I need to download AnyConnect in a rush, it will prompt me for my Cisco login account. Nobody wants to download a client to a firewall that they don't own.I would definitely love to have a much nicer web interface compared to the systems interface that it has now. I also would like to download utilities without having to login into the system. Nobody would want to download a client unless they're going to use it with a physical firewall. I don't understand the logic. If I was a hacker, I could get someone to download it for me and then I can use the client. There's no logic behind it.For how long have I used the solution?Three to five years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?I would rate their stability a nine out of ten. It's pretty stable. I never come across a situation where the firewall hangs and then I need to reboot it.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?Cisco is expensive and when you want to grow, it means you're going to need to spend some money but you can justify it.We have closer to 50 users on the firewall at the moment and do have plans to increase usage.If you previously used a different solution, which one did you use and why did you switch?We were previously using Sophos firewall but it had a lot of issues.How was the initial setup?The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other firewalls but once you get it right, especially the assistant control list, it's fine. It's a little difficult compared to other firewalls.The deployment took us about three days because we did some testing and we also did certain attacks and checked some hackers which is why it took some time. We wanted to make sure that it was at least 99.99% protected.What about the implementation team?We implemented through a UK company called Rackspace.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions. Especially in other regions because people are very careful when it comes to spending on IT infrastructure. My suggestion is, first test it, once you see how good it is you will definitely want to renew it.What other advice do I have?I would advise someone considering this solution to just go for it. It's expensive but it's a robust solution. The only thing is that you have to convince your finance guy to go for it.I would rate it a nine out of ten.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-04-08
Rated 5 out of 5 by from It creates a secure tunnel for our network. It is very scalable. What is our primary use case?It helps the firewall in our network and the VPN (Virtual Private Network). It creates a secure tunnel for our network.What is most valuable?The IPS (In-plane switching) is the most valuable feature. This enables visibility to our networks and to outside attacks. It is a solution to maintain the visibility.What needs improvement?At times the product is sluggish and slow. Sometimes when deploying a new configuration or role, it is painstakingly slow. It should be a little faster than it is.For how long have I used the solution?Less than one year.What do I think about the stability of the solution?It is a very stable solution.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?It is a scalable product. We have a lot of demand. But, it supports any additional network that we add. It expands easily.How are customer service and technical support?Normally the Cisco tech support team are good. But, we have had some problems with tech support with this product. Some of the tech support team are really not familiar with how the IPS works. And, there is some disconnect between the tech support. Maybe they're not trained well. They're helpful, but not knowledgeable.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-03-11
Rated 4 out of 5 by from We're assured that all updates, all patches, and all fixes are done instantaneously What is our primary use case?We mainly use this solution for our firewall and it's one layer of our security. From the time that we've used it, the organization as a whole got a sense of security because Cisco is a known product. When we do need support locally or online, we get it instantaneously. We use this solution for a couple of things: for security, for their technical support, and in terms of the knowledge and skills of the team here that gave us a good grip and confidence in the use of the product.How has it helped my organization?It gives the organization a higher vote of confidence. When I joined the organization more than six years ago, we were using the old Cisco, and some of the products already reached their end of life. Some of the products were not in its latest state, in terms of security or license. We've learned a very good lesson there. Since then, when we upgraded we made sure that all the licenses and all the security facets are in place. It gives the organization a higher vote of confidence. There may have been one or two incidences of malicious threats, but it did not really bring down the organization to a level that we would all be sorry for. The greatest benefit for the organization is the confidence that we are secured.What is most valuable?Cisco is known as a popular and trusted product. Because of its constant RND, we're assured that all updates, all patches, all fixes are done instantaneously. As far as the feature is concerned, it gives us a certain layer of protection. As a CIO, my vote of confidence is in the product itself. After making sure that we always have all the updates on the licenses we're assured that we're getting all the necessary security protection.What other advice do I have?I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. Not a ten because I'm reserving the one point for whatever new surprises they are going to provide.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2019-02-12
Rated 4 out of 5 by from It provides security for our company, and our users. What is our primary use case?It is our firewall solution. We connect to other locations, as well as use programs in-house.What is most valuable?The most valuable feature is the security it provides our company, and our users.Furthermore, our company uses it for making rules for the bank to connect to our server in the DMZ, which is a security challenge.What needs improvement?It needs improvement as a "Next-Generation" firewall solution. In addition, it needs to be more user-friendly.For how long have I used the solution?More than five years.What do I think about the stability of the solution?There is no downtime, and it is working great.What do I think about the scalability of the solution?It is scalable. We have had no issues.What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?The initial setup was complex. But, after that, to maintain and keep creating rules it was easy.Which other solutions did I evaluate?We also looked at Fortinet Forti-Gate VM.Disclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2018-12-28
Rated 4 out of 5 by from It speaks well to high productive platforms and it has good capabilities. Primary Use CaseGenerally, it has highly productive platforms and it has good capabilities.BenefitsIt just works like an internal firewall. It's an ordinary role of this platform, nothing special.Valuable FeaturesAt this point, we find that this product has high productivity and high availability and there is no need for improvement.Room for ImprovementIf there is old hardware, or old appliances, it does not necessarily work with the new Cisco generation firewalls.Use of SolutionThree to five years.Stability IssuesIt is a highly stable product. We rarely receive any serious outdates, so it works quite well.Customer Service and Technical SupportYes, we use the technical support maybe twice a year. We received a very fast response time.Initial SetupIt was very straightforward. It was not complex at all.ROIWhen evaluating a possible solution, I always consider:* Availability* ProductivityDisclaimer: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Date published: 2018-11-01
Rated 4 out of 5 by from One of the most valuable features is the correlation of events -- including the path that a file is taking in the network and its integration with the endpoint protection. Valuable FeaturesClassic ASA ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/cisco-asa ) features such as NAT, Stateful Firewall, and VPN are basic functions for average organizations, but next generation features such as the granular control of port hopping applications, IPs, and malware protection are mandatory, considering current advanced security threats.One of the most valuable features is the correlation of events, including the path that a file takes in the network and its integration with the endpoint protection. This gives you the chance to take some actions in the case a breach happens.Improvements to My OrganizationVisibility in the network traffic.Room for ImprovementManagement console – Firesight Management Center.When deploying Cisco FMC versions 6.0 and 6.1, some issues may appear when trying to register ASA sensors. The problem needs Cisco TAC involvement, adding more effort and time. I guess this will be fixed in version 6.2.Use of SolutionI've used this solution for three to five years.Stability IssuesSome releases of the unified image (FTD – Firepower Threat Defense ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/cisco-firepower-ngfw ) – Cisco ASA + Sourcefire IPS ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/cisco-sourcefire-firewalls )) are not very stable, but things are getting improved.Scalability IssuesSome clustering functions are not available in the unified image.Customer Service and Technical SupportExcellent.Previous SolutionsOld ASA 5500. Natural upgrade to next generation functions.Initial SetupInitial setup is pretty straightforward.Pricing, Setup Cost and LicensingThe licensing model has been simplified and is easy to understand. The price is higher compared to UTM solutions, such as Fortinet ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/fortinet-fortigate ), but in the same range as Checkpoint ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/check-point-utm-1 ) and Palo Alto ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/palo-alto-networks-wildfire ).Other Solutions ConsideredWe also work with Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, FireEye ( https://www.itcentralstation.com/vendors/fireeye ), and some other vendors.Other AdviceTake a look at the features included in the unified image. Some classic ASA functionality has not been integrated yet, go for non-unified image if the deployment requires something that is not available – classic ASA iOS plus Sourcefire code.Disclaimer: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:
Date published: 2018-01-24
  • y_2019, m_6, d_19, h_16
  • bvseo_bulk, prod_bvrr, vn_bulk_2.0.12
  • cp_1, bvpage1
  • co_hasreviews, tv_0, tr_51
  • loc_en_US, sid_2635615, prod, sort_[SortEntry(order=SUBMISSION_TIME, direction=DESCENDING), SortEntry(order=FEATURED, direction=DESCENDING)]
  • clientName_cdw