We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Zscaler Cloud Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The security features are about the best that I've seen anywhere."
"It is easy to use and performs very well."
"FortiGate firewalls are user-friendly, and I like the security profiling features."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"It is very flexible to use."
"The reporting and monitoring are very good."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ability to work in proxy mode, which other solutions, such as Palo Alto cannot. There are some features that are better that come at no extra license or subscriptions cost, such as basic SD-WAN. The DLT is useful, other solutions have the same feature too, such as Palo Alto."
"Valuable features include the Web Application Firewall, and it even has DLP (data leak prevention)."
"The most valuable feature is that you can launch it in a very short time. You don't have to wait for the hardware to arrive and get it staged and installed. From that perspective, it is easy to launch. It is also scalable."
"The most valuable features are security and support."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are."
"In Palo Alto the most important feature is the App-ID."
"App-ID and User-ID have repeatedly shown value in securing business critical systems."
"It has the ability to create Palo Alto VM-series using software."
"The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS."
"The scalability is okay. We have around 2200 people using this solution."
"The visibility and log availability offered are highly valued for troubleshooting purposes, and this is a key factor driving customer interest in the firewall module."
"Includes advanced tech protection."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution is scalable."
"It helps a lot of companies to reduce their downtime. Also, It helps businesses in terms of being secured and protected from any threats."
"The solution offers good sandboxing."
"It provides in-depth visibility into your network, ensuring that traffic flowing into your organization, be it from offices or individual users, is effectively filtered and secured through multiple layers of protection."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard and UI, as well as to the reporting."
"The cloud management and automation capability could be improved."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"I would suggest that Fortinet add sandboxing to their solution."
"We would like to see an upgrade to the VPN feature, we are using the VPN from outside of our office and there is a limitation to 10 connections, more connections would be suitable."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"It'll help if Palo Alto Networks provided better documentation."
"From time to time, they have released some content updates that have some issues, maybe twice a year."
"All areas need improvement: manufacturing, education, financial, etc."
"Palo Alto is that it is really bad when it comes to technical support."
"The product could be better in terms of performance than one of its competitors."
"We have ran into issues with Palo Alto’s limitations for resolving large IP lists from DNS lookups, as well as the antivirus interfering with App-ID."
"In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the endpoints and the firewalls."
"It has to be more scalable for the deployment of VMs on the cloud."
"Its technical support services could be better."
"Data Leak Prevention is only for web filtering and there is no protection for email."
"There are some areas it could improve when it comes to blocking, we have to block some things manually. For example, if we block a top-level domain we have seen that the new IPs come through, the IPs are not blocked. There should be some more granular way of doing it. My only request is if you're blocking something at a top level, the sub-level sub-domains and all those other IPs should be blocked too automatically."
"They do not provide a few components that are fundamental to differentiate the products"
"Because it's on cloud, it doesn't allow application of extra settings."
"The product could improve its integration with some legacy systems."
"When it comes to customer support, there is room for improvement in Zscaler's service."
"Certain criteria need to be met if you want to scale this solution."
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews while Zscaler Cloud Firewall is ranked 26th in Firewalls with 15 reviews. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6, while Zscaler Cloud Firewall is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Cloud Firewall writes "A highly stable and comprehensive cloud security and access solution". Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall, whereas Zscaler Cloud Firewall is most compared with Azure Firewall, OPNsense, Cisco Multicloud Defense, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs. Zscaler Cloud Firewall report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
