Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Reviews

Our primary use case for Palo Alto Threat Prevention is related to the placement of files in a laboratory test environment. We use Palo Alto Threat Prevention for network testing.

I can't give an example of how Palo Alto has improved our organization because we are using this product in test networks.

The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Threat Prevention for our company is the next generation firewall.

The organization mail security solutions could be improved. There is no mail security solution available.

Palo Alto Threat Prevention is naturally stable in operations.

I don't see a problem with Palo Alto Threat Prevention in scalability. Because it's a testing product for use it only for test alignment.

We have maybe 10 or 12 engineers dedicated to the solution. Only engineers are using this product. For deployment and maintenance, only one staff.

We use Palo Alto Threat Prevention just for testing.

Palo Alto's technical support is very good.

The setup of Palo Alto Threat Prevention is very easy and straightforward. From initial configuration to deployment, it took maybe one day.

We did not use an integrator, re-seller, or consultant for the deployment.

I would rate Palo Alto Threat Prevention a nine out of ten overall. I would prefer better mail security features.

Our primary use case is to have as a gateway.

The dimensions is one of the most valuable features. WildFire is the sandbox solution from Palo Alto. No other sandbox solution can match WildFire.

The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are. 

We have been using Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention for a year. 

I don't have any stability problems with Palo Alto. Palo Alto is one of the greatest products in terms of stability. Compared to other solutions, Palo Alto is the most stable. 

I think it's very scalable, but in terms of the firewall, you need to define first where the firewall is located. You can deploy it anywhere, but it really depends on the environment of the customer.

The initial setup was not so complex but not so simple. It depends on the requirements of the deployment. Sometimes it should be simple but sometimes you need more knowledge to connect the device.

The deployment can take around one month. Sometimes the project manager wants to extend the session with the customer and maybe upgrade the migration. Then he asks the customer if there are any problems or is there are any additional issues that come up after the migration. In terms of the configuration, it takes less than five days but in terms of the project, we saw more cases that took around a month.

We only need a project manager and engineer for the deployment. Some deployments require additional engineers. From our customer's side, we usually discuss the deployment with the security team. 

For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto.

Palo Alto is a bit pricy compared to different models. Customers try to compare the price between other solutions, like Fortinet, Cisco, and Checkpoint. 

In the next release, I would like for Palo Alto to work on email protection. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten.