Comparing SSL/TLS Decryption Across Cisco, Palo Alto, Fortinet & Sophos

In today’s zero-trust world, encrypted traffic isn’t something that happens from time to time — it’s happening all the time. An enormous amount of web traffic is already TLS-encrypted, and if you aren’t decrypting it for inspection, you’re effectively flying blind to threats lost within plain sight. But not all SSL/TLS decryption (or “tls inspection”) solutions are the same. When comparing Cisco, Palo Alto, Fortinet or Sophos, It’s important to have a grasp of the trade-offs for performance, visibility, complexity and privacy!

Here is how those four powerhouses compare — and what that means for your managed IT strategy.

---

Why SSL/TLS Decryption Matters

Before we get into the specifics of our various vendors, step back for a second. SSL/TLS Decryption (commonly called SSL inspection or tls inspection) enables a firewall or security appliance to act as a “man-in-the-middle” and decrypt traffic, inspect for threats/contents, re-encrypt and send it to the destination. This provides you with detailed insight into encrypted flows which would otherwise go undetected.

But decryption has a cost: overhead on the CPU, potential for latency and cert management, because you still need certs to decrypt something. Reason why many enterprises used offloading strategies – dedicated appliances or modules to do the dirty job of decryption. It’s all about balancing depth of inspection with performance.

---

Cisco: Centralized Offload and Flexible Inspection

Approach & Architecture
Cisco’s solution leans heavily on SSL offloading. Their SSL Inspection (“SSLi”) bundles involve purpose-built ADC (Application Delivery Controller) hardware that handles decryption and re-encryption, rather than forcing all of that work onto your firewall.

This offload model means that once the traffic is decrypted, it can be steered to a variety of downstream inspection tools (firewalls, IPS, malware protection) without each device performing decryption themselves.

Decryption Modes
Cisco Secure Firewalls support two main TLS/SSL decryption modes:

1. Decrypt – Known Key: For internal servers where you control the certificate/private key.
2. Decrypt – Resign: For external SSL connections, performing MITM with an internal CA.

These decryption policies are attached to Access Control Policies in Cisco’s Firepower / Secure Firewall ecosystem.

Protocol Support
In recent versions, Cisco supports decrypting TLS 1.3 when Snort 3 is enabled. They also support decryption for other encrypted protocols (e.g., IMAPS, POP3S, FTPS).

Privacy & Policy Control
Cisco provides fine-grained SSL policy controls. You can exempt sensitive categories (e.g., banking, health) from decryption. Also, their SSL policies let you block weak TLS versions or insecure cipher suites before even decrypting.

Risks & Challenges

• Decrypting traffic requires real computing power; SSL decryption rules consume significant resources.
• You need to manage a CA for resigning, and client machines must trust it — otherwise you trigger certificate warnings.
• Without proper tuning, there’s a risk of performance bottlenecks, especially if decryption is done on less-optimised hardware.

Summary
Cisco’s model is ideal if you want a scalable decryption offload architecture and want to centralize decryption, preserving downstream security tooling. It’s particularly suitable if you already use Cisco Secure Firewall and need high bandwidth capacity.

---

Palo Alto: Integrated NGFW Inspection + Flexible Decryption

Approach & Architecture
Palo Alto’s firewalls (NGFWs) provide integrated SSL forward proxy (outbound decryption) and SSL inbound inspection within the NGFW itself — without necessarily using an external offload device.

• SSL Forward Proxy: Decrypts outbound client → internet traffic so you can do threat prevention, App-ID, and URL filtering.
• SSL Inbound Inspection: For servers inside your network, you can upload server certificates and private keys and inspect inbound encrypted traffic.

Advanced Capabilities
Palo Alto supports handshake inspection, where the firewall can look at the TLS handshake (SNI, cipher suite, certificate) even before full decryption. This helps enforce policies earlier.

Decryption profiles enable you to block insecure TLS versions or weak cipher suites, reject sessions, and re-sign certificates.

Performance Trade-offs
Because decryption happens inside the NGFW, there’s a resource hit. Some customers report performance drops when enabling full decryption + threat prevention, especially with TLS 1.3. As one user noted, “ssl decryption … forces you down to 4.6–6 Gbps” on a model that could otherwise handle more.

TLS 1.3 Handling
Palo Alto supports certain TLS 1.3 cipher suites, but there can be compatibility issues depending on client/server implementation. Also, some configurations downgrade TLS 1.3 to 1.2 for compatibility, which has its own trade-offs.

Best Practices

• Use decryption profiles to reject old TLS versions or weak ciphers.
• Whitelist sensitive traffic or trusted domains to avoid privacy or performance issues.
• Monitor handshake logs to fine-tune which sessions to decrypt.

Summary
Palo Alto offers a fully integrated, policy-driven decryption + inspection in its NGFWs. This is great if you prefer simplicity and don’t want to deploy a separate SSL offload appliance — but you’ll need to evaluate the performance impact carefully.

---

Fortinet: Deep Inspection + High Throughput

Approach & Architecture
Fortinet’s FortiGate firewalls support two modes of SSL/TLS inspection:

1. Certificate Inspection: Checks only header-level SSL info (e.g., SNI, certificate CN), without full decryption.
2. Full (Deep) Inspection: Performs MITM decryption, inspects the payload, and re-signs with a FortiGate-generated certificate.

In deep inspection mode, FortiGate acts as a subordinate CA, generating certificates on the fly.

Cert Trust Considerations
Users must trust the FortiGate CA on their endpoints. If they don’t, they’ll see certificate errors. FortiGate allows you to upload your own CA certificate (e.g., an enterprise CA) if you prefer more control.

Client Certificate (mTLS) Limitations
If your server requires client certificates (mutual TLS), FortiGate’s deep inspection has limitations. As per technical notes, FortiGate does not relay the client certificate to the server while performing deep inspection. In some cases, this forces you to bypass inspection for mTLS flows.

Performance Optimizations

• FortiGate offers hardware acceleration for SSL/TLS decryption on certain models, reducing CPU load.
• Use whitelists to exclude sensitive categories (finance, health) from deep inspection by default.
• Gradually rollout decryption — don’t enable deep inspection for all traffic at once; monitor CPU, throughput, and SSL error logs.

Pitfalls & Real-World Feedback

• Some users report certificate warnings or broken sites when full inspection is enabled, especially if the client doesn’t trust the FortiGate CA.
• There are community-reported issues around TLS 1.3 and deep inspection, particularly with newer encryption features like ECH (Encrypted Client Hello).

Summary
Fortinet excels when you need high-throughput deep TLS inspection, especially on hardware-accelerated platforms. But success depends heavily on CA trust, and certain advanced TLS features can catch you off-guard.

---

Sophos: Policy-Driven, Flexible Inspection with Attention to Compatibility

Architecture & Engine
Sophos Firewall’s SSL/TLS inspection is policy-driven: administrators define inspection rules (based on source, destination, web categories, users) and attach decryption profiles.

They support both transparent (bump-in-wire) and explicit proxy modes, depending on your deployment.

Re-Signing / Certificate Handling
Sophos re-signs decrypted traffic with a local CA that you choose, and endpoints must trust this CA. For self-signed original server certificates, Sophos will preserve the “self-signed” property while replacing the key to maintain trust behavior.

TLS 1.3 Compatibility
One of Sophos’s strengths is flexibility around TLS 1.3: in its settings, you can decrypt as TLS 1.3 or choose to downgrade to TLS 1.2, depending on compatibility needs. This is particularly useful for environments where some clients or servers don’t play nice with TLS 1.3 yet.

Performance and Engine Efficiency
Sophos’s “Xstream” SSL Inspection engine (seen in newer XG platforms) is built into their DPI engine and is optimized for performance. According to their own webcast, this is not a heavyweight HTTPS proxy but a lightweight TCP-layer proxy that integrates naturally with DPI.

Policy & Privacy Controls
You can customize decryption profiles to define what to do when non-decryptable traffic is encountered (reject, allow, drop).
Default exclusion rules exist (for web categories, IPs) so you don’t force decrypt everything — which helps with privacy compliance.

Common Challenges

• In MSP environments, SSL inspection can break remote management tools (like RDP / RD Gateway) if not excluded correctly.
• You need to manage re-signing CAs carefully; endpoints must trust them, else you face usability and browser warning issues.

Summary
Sophos offers a balanced and flexible approach to ssl decryption: powerful policy controls, decent performance via their optimized DPI engine, and good support for TLS 1.3 compatibility. It’s especially appealing for organizations that want to tailor which traffic is decrypted, and need a less resource-heavy footprint compared to massive NGFW decryption.

---

Comparative Analysis: Cisco vs. Palo Alto vs. Fortinet vs. Sophos

Let’s put it all together through a few key lenses:

Dimension	Cisco	Palo Alto	Fortinet	Sophos
Architecture	Offload via SSLi bundles (ADC)	Built into NGFW	Native or certificate-inspection / deep inspection	Integrated DPI engine, policy-based
Decryption Modes	Known-Key, Resign	Forward Proxy (outbound), Inbound Inspection	Certificate only, Full Deep Inspection	Decrypt / Don’t Decrypt with TLS downgrade option
TLS 1.3 Support	Yes (with Snort 3) Cisco	Yes, but compatibility trade-offs, possible downgrade	Yes (but certain edge TLS scenarios may break) Reddit	Yes, decrypt or downgrade option docs.sophos.com+1
Performance Optimisation	Dedicated hardware	Depends on NGFW model	SSL accelerator on some hardware; whitelisting	Optimized lightweight proxy engine
Privacy / Policy Controls	SSL policy with block/whitelist, resigning rules	Decryption profiles, handshake inspection	Exemptions by category, CA management	Rule-based decryption, exclusion lists
Complexity / Overhead	Higher initial cost for SSLi appliance; requires CA	Simpler deployment (all in FW), but resource cost	Certificate trust, client CA management, mTLS caveats	Need to design rules carefully, manage CA, adjust TLS settings

---

Strategic Recommendations for Managed IT Leaders

As senior decision-makers in managed IT, you should think in terms of risk vs reward, future scale, and business constraints. Here’s what to keep in mind:

1. Start with Use Cases
   • Do you need full visibility into outbound SaaS traffic, or just control over high-risk categories?
   • Do you host internal services that require inbound SSL inspection?
   • What compliance or privacy constraints apply to your clients (e.g., finance, healthcare)?
2. Evaluate Performance Budget
   • If you’re handling large volumes of TLS traffic, an offload solution (Cisco) or a hardware-accelerated box (Fortinet) might be beneficial.
   • If you have moderate traffic and want simplicity, an integrated NGFW (Palo Alto, Sophos) could be sufficient.
3. Plan Certificate Strategy
   • Deploying a CA (internal or subordinate) is non-trivial. Make sure you have a plan for certificate distribution and trust.
   • For TLS 1.3, decide early whether you will decrypt as 1.3 or downgrade to 1.2, balancing compatibility and security.
4. Phased Rollout
   • Don’t enable decryption for 100% of traffic immediately. Start with high-risk flows, measure impact, then expand.
   • Monitor CPU, latency, and TLS error logs closely. Fine-tune policies (e.g., decryption profiles, exemptions) as you learn.
5. User Education and Privacy
   • Communicate with your end users / clients: let them know which categories are decrypted, why, and how their privacy is preserved via exclusion rules.
   • Maintain a good governance model around which traffic is decrypted and who has access to decrypted logs/data.

---

Conclusion

SSL/TLS decryption is no longer an optional “nice to have” — it’s critical for real security. But turning it on without a clear strategy or the right architecture can backfire: you might overload devices, break client ergonomics, or even violate privacy expectations.

• Cisco gives you high capacity and a centralized offload, ideal for scaling.
• Palo Alto offers integrated NGFW inspection with advanced policy control.
• Fortinet delivers deep inspection with hardware acceleration and high throughput.
• Sophos provides flexible policy-driven inspection with strong TLS 1.3 compatibility.

Choosing the right model (or combination) depends on your technical constraints, trust model, and business priorities. As managed IT leaders, balancing visibility, performance, and risk will be key to getting SSL inspection right — without turning it into a burden.