Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs Trellix Network Detection and Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
2.8
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Network Detection a...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is 13.2%, up from 12.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Network Detection and Response is 5.1%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

Mario Lacroix - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 11, 2024
Provides seamless automation functionality and has a straightforward setup process
We use the product to enhance threat detection and response. We utilize it as part of a broader security ecosystem to monitor and block potential cyber threats. Our environment includes multiple financial clients and has tailored rules for specific needs, such as anti-fraud measures. The solution…
BiswabhanuPanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 4, 2024
Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one
The in-depth investigation capabilities are a major advantage. When the system flags something as malicious, it provides a packet capture of that activity within the environment. That helps my team quickly identify additional context that most other tools wouldn't offer – like source IP or base64 encoded data. We can also see DNS requests and other details that aren't readily available in solutions like Check Point or others that we've tried. The detection itself is solid, and their sandboxing is powerful. There's a learning curve – you need a strong grasp of OS-level changes, process forking, registry changes, and the potential impact of those. But with that knowledge, the level of information Trellix provides is far greater than what we've seen elsewhere. The real-time response capability of Trellix has been quite effective, although it's not very fast. The key is this solution's concept of 'preference zero.' They don't immediately act on a zero-day. For example, the solution has seen a piece of malware for the first time. It'll let it in, then do sandboxing. Maybe after four or five minutes, it identifies that specific file's DNX Secure Store as malicious. At that point, they update the static analysis engine, and it gets detected if anything else tries to download the same file. There is that initial 'preference zero' concept, like with Panda. You may not hold traffic in the network. That's standard in the industry; we don't do much about it. To address that, we also have endpoint solutions. We use SentinelOne in our environment, which helps us identify threats like Western Bureaus and others.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I have files tickets and their support was great. I was able to solve the problems of my customers."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten since we never faced any issues."
"We get support in the free version."
"Whole team can use the firewall and understand it."
"The graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure."
"The solution is scalable."
"Scalable ATP solution that's quick to set up. It demonstrates good performance and stability."
"They have many different options with Palo Alto WildFire and the set-up is quick. If you have all the details in hand, it does not take more than 15 minutes to deploy a firewall."
"Very functional and good for detecting malicious traffic."
"The server appliance is good."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"Its ability to find zero-day threats, malware and anything malicious has greatly improved my customer's organization, especially for protecting the users' browser."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
 

Cons

"The data analytical system for deployment needs to improve."
"The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective."
"​They provide a medium level of technical support."
"As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity."
"In terms of what I'd like to see in the next release of Palo Alto Networks WildFire, each release is based on malware that has been identified. The key problem is an average of six months from the time malware is written to the time it's discovered and a signature is created for it. The only advice that I can give is for them to shorten that timeframe. I don't know how they would do it, but if they shorten that, for example, cut it in half, they'll make themselves more famous."
"The product's false positive logs could be more user-friendly to understand. They could provide examples of precious cases to learn."
"One area for improvement is the expansion of the sandbox environment to include a broader range of platforms, such as Linux, macOS, and mobile operating systems."
"The cost of the solution is excessively high."
"I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports."
"The initial setup was complex because of the nature of our environment. When it comes to the type of applications and functions which we were looking at in terms of identifying malicious threats, there would be some level of complexity, if we were doing it right."
"It would be great if we could create granular reports based on the protocols, types of attacks, regions of attack, etc. Also we would like to easily be able to add exceptions to rules in cases of false positives."
"It is not a very secure product."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"The analytics could be better. It seems heavily influenced by the McAfee and FireEye integration, and that integration still isn't seamless."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is very pricey and it depends on the package that you implement."
"The price is expensive but is reasonable considering overall functionality."
"It's comparable to what the competition is. It is probably a little lesser than what the competition is because, as a state government, we go for whatever the lowest cost is."
"Palo Alto Networks WildFire is an expensive product."
"The pricing and licensing option should be categorized for various countries such as for Bangladesh."
"​More expensive than other firewalls.​"
"The pricing is OK, it is not too expensive."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
"The user fee is not as high but the maintenance fee is expensive."
"When you purchase FireEye Network Security NX, will need to purchase a megabit per second package. You must know your needs from day one."
"The tool is a bit pricey."
"There are some additional services that I understand the vendor provides, but our approach was to package all of the features that we were looking to use into the product."
"FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market."
"Its price is a bit high. A small customer cannot buy it. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"When I compare this solution to its competitors in the market, I find that it is a little expensive."
"Pricing and licensing are reasonable compared to competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks Wildfire?
The Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is a very powerful and very complex piece of anti-viral software. When one considers that fact, it is all the more impressive that the setup is a fairly straightf...
Which is better - Wildfire or FortiGate?
FortiGate has a lot going for it and I consider it to be the best, most user-friendly firewall out there. What I like the most about it is that it has an attractive web dashboard with very easy nav...
How does Cisco ASA Firewall compare with Palo Alto's WildFire?
When looking to change our ASA Firewall, we looked into Palo Alto’s WildFire. It works especially in preventing advanced malware and zero-day exploits with real-time intelligence. The sandbox featu...
What do you like most about FireEye Network Security?
We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. With Trellix, we easily confirmed that there was no lateral network involvement an...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?
The pricing is fair, a little expensive, but fair. We've evaluated other products, and they're similarly priced. It's a bit on the expensive side, but we don't want to compromise with cheap, less r...
What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?
The solution's support needs to improve their support.
 

Also Known As

No data available
FireEye Network Security, FireEye
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.