The most valuable features of this solution are all of the services it provides.
The application layer to the hardware Layer is good, as are all layers it offers.
It's a very comprehensive solution.
The most valuable features of this solution are all of the services it provides.
The application layer to the hardware Layer is good, as are all layers it offers.
It's a very comprehensive solution.
The features should be built into the system. For example, it generates many logs with a lot of information that can be converted into security and business information and shown to the user. This is a time-consuming job.
I would like to see it provide us with intelligent information from the data that it captures, within the same cost.
I have been using this solution for two years.
It's a very stable product, so far.
It's very scalable. We have 300 users in our company.
Technical support is very good.
We have worked with various firewalls such as Check Point, Sophos, Cisco, and some unknown product names as well.
There are several things to consider before recommending a solution. It depends on the business requirements, the budget, and the complexity of the security needs.
I believe that Palo Alto is the best one, then Check Point and Sophos. Those are my three preferences.
Palo Alto and Check Point would be rated an eight out of ten and the others would be a seven out of ten.
The initial setup is complex, but it can be done.
The rollout takes a couple of weeks but you have to keep improving it every day.
Part of the setup was completed by me, with some help externally.
We have a subcontractor for maintenance.
This is an expensive product, as are the others of this type.
Know your business requirements, the features, the ease of use, and know what type of budget you have. These are the types of requirements to know before you use this product.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Solutions like firewalls and routers improve any company. If you don't have them, then I wouldn't be doing business with you.
Palo Alto has embedded machine learning in the core of the firewall to provide inline, real-time attack prevention. That's big. We're embedding that type of security and information into every part of our corporate network as well as our products.
It has helped to reduce downtime in our organization. The savings are probably in single digits.
I typically get involved with it when it comes to audit and compliance and having to gather evidence of those firewalls, routers, and rule sets. The evidence that I typically need is there.
We got a lot of integrations into it, but I don't know if it integrates with all.
I don't deal with it from a day-to-day perspective, but I can say that the evidence that I typically need is there, but sometimes, it's a task to actually get it and pull it out. They can make it easier to gather that evidence. From our NetOps team's perspective also, they can make it easier to manage and constantly update those rule sets.
I don't know for how long exactly we have been using this solution, but I've been aware that we've had them probably since about 2016 or 2017.
It's very stable. They are highly ranked within their space.
It's a good product for securing all types of workplaces. It's specifically good for data centers, which are all brick-and-mortar houses. Small businesses must also have it because they don't have the ability to have everything in a cloud or virtualized firewalls and other things like that.
I haven't dealt with their support team.
I was not involved in its initial deployment.
I am able to gather some of the evidence and things that I need. Our NetOps team uses it heavily, and they love it.
I would assume that it's still within mid-range given its company structure and everything else. My guess is it's still okay.
To someone at another company who says, “We are just looking for the cheapest and fastest firewall,” I would say that you just lost the customer because I'm not going to do business with somebody who is going for the cheapest. I'm always looking for a vendor or customer that has more input and cares about the security of their systems.
The value received from attending an RSA Conference includes prizes and other things, but on a personal level, I love the tech talks, knowing about a lot of industry changes, and different product solutions being showcased.
RSAC definitely has an impact on our organization’s cybersecurity purchases made throughout the year. One of my main roles is vendor due diligence, so I come to RSA quite often, and I have conversations with many different sales engineers who can explain the security of their products because that's what I focus on during our onboarding process.
Overall, I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.
We use Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls with Prisma and cloud environments.
As a firewall, it effectively protects our environment from threats.
In general, I appreciate the regular firewall function of the Palo Alto Networks NG Firewall.
Overall, it is a good networking device product.
From my perspective, having machine learning integrated into the core of the Palo Alto NG Firewalls is very important for enabling real-time attack prevention.
As far as I know, the use of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls has resulted in reduced downtime, but I am not directly involved with that department.
One main issue I've encountered is customer service. Occasionally, when I open a request, it gets closed automatically, without any explanation, leaving me unsure of what happened to it. However, overall, the product itself works well. As for Prisma Cloud, it could benefit from some additional functionality, but the main issue is the lack of communication regarding closed requests.
There is room for improvement in the area of customer service.
I have had experience working with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls for three or more years.
The stability of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is good.
Technical support is lacking. I would rate the technical support a seven out of ten.
Neutral
Previously, we worked with Cisco Secure Firewall.
We switched to Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls because it was a good deal for the company.
I was not involved in the deployment.
Another team was responsible for running the proof of concept.
I don't have any knowledge or experience regarding the unified platform and native integration of all security capabilities provided by Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls.
Based on my experience, evaluating the security solution for all workplaces from the smallest office to the largest data centers cannot be assessed by a single path. However, in general, the solution is performing its intended job well.
I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls an eight out of ten.
Attending the RSA conference provided me with an enormous amount of knowledge on various topics such as new technologies, and threats in different environments, including cloud and on-premises. Which impacts my purchase throughout the year afterward.
One of our objectives is to search for new solutions, whether to replace current ones with more modern options or to explore new sandboxes, technologies, and vulnerabilities.
Basically, it is for protection and security. We are using it to make sure that our network is as secure as possible. We are able to evaluate each stack in each pocket and take certain actions as needed when we look into some of the content of the payload.
We have on-prem deployments, and we also have SaaS-based services.
Mechanically, all firewalls work in a similar fashion, but what makes Palo Alto different is that it also has some of the threat hunt capabilities. It is a little bit better than other vendors.
As things are evolving, we want to make sure that Palo Alto is able to keep up with what is going on outside. They should continue to do more intelligence-related enhancements and integrate with some of the other security tools. We want to have a more intelligent toolset down the road.
We implemented this solution last year.
We currently have 25,000 users. Its usage won't increase a lot, but IT is changing very rapidly, and it would depend on the security model towards which we are moving.
Palo Alto provides pretty good support.
It is straightforward. The deployment duration varies because there are different modules and components, but it doesn't mean that we have to complete everything to make it work. For the core piece of it, it would probably take a couple of months to install, configure, and test.
We have a vendor to help us. We have two or three people for its deployment.
It has a yearly subscription.
I would recommend this solution. I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls an eight out of ten.
Upstream and data center NGFW.
Security, visibility and control, you can secure your environment from many types of attacks such as virus, malware, DoS attacks, intrusions, bad URLs, bad domains with basic DNS security which it an awesome feature.Visibility, that you will be aware of the is going on inside your network, such as malicious activities, decrypt the encrypted packets, as well as policy audit review.
This solution has really helped the technical engineers to deliver the implementation faster than the before.
All of the features are good. The new release of the new basic platform provides you with a huge number of features, such as policy review, DNS security, Machine learning, Network traffic profiling, Bare metal analysis
(Malware) On-prime scanning should be considered.
Endpoint management (traps) better to be on-prime than cloud.
QoS, It should be more sophisticated than it is now.
TAC support should cover meddle east area by Arabic support, such as in France, Germany, Italy and Japanese.
I like the stability of the solution. From a stability perspective, all of them are stable. Sometimes Cisco's older versions, maybe from two years ago, were not as stable. Now, Cisco has improved its firewall and security products.
In terms of scalability, no security products are scalable to upgrade. Not ever. While assuming you are dealing with scalability, you have room to increase or to have room to expand, but actually, you don't because there is limited support. Even if you bring in the highest model, it's still limited.
Their support is very limited. It's limited compared to the competitors. They need multi-language support. Now, they provide support in English only.
If anyone in the Middle East opens a ticket, they have to do it in Arabic but they get support in English, not in Arabic. The communication between the technical people or the campus sites to the vendors now is in English.
The initial setup was very easy. All the initial setups have become very easy. Before, the setup used to take a week to implement a firewall. Now it's a couple of minutes or one day maximum for fine-tuning. To fine-tune the firewall it can take one day, two days if you are junior. In terms of how many people you will need to deploy the solution, it depends because the firewall is not a straightforward technology like any security program.
We used on-site security advisors.
7 years
In terms of pricing, every model has a license. For example a small model, the license around 1,000 USD. The next one around 2,000 USD. The next range is 11,000 USD to 13,000 USD. It's expensive compared to PaloAlto competitors.
Yes, was fortinet
Palo Alto's firewall protects your network against attacks, threats, and many other things. Networking can be more advanced. You can upgrade the edition of Palo Alto. There's competition between Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls. Most IT security people don't know which to pick. For a basic firewall, I recommend Fortinet because it has two or three basic firewalls. I personally need a data center firewall. Datacenter firewalls I would recommend FortiGate because of the support. It provides a high level of support.
The latest Palo Alto release has many new features. It can provide you with audits, and policy auditing for a policy review. This allows you to know what's going on inside the network from a quality perspective because sometimes you can create new policies - up to one million policies. You can choose policies, and sometimes you get something by mistake. It provides you with an ability to view or do a policy review or policy audit. This is a major feature. It's a very important feature because before it was impossible to bring the visibility to the policy audits to let me know what's going on inside my policies. Now Palo Alto has provided this feature.
In terms of advice I'd give to someone considering this solution, I'd say they should read more before going to the implementation phase. They have to read the administrative guides, and product guides before going to implementation. They have to check the platform because different versions of the platform have some new features. The technical people have to review before going to implement it because sometimes they don't need to upgrade this platform or this version. It is not a stable version. You have to read more before going to do the implementation. Ask an advisor, the vendors or call Palo Alto. You can call them, they have great coverage in any country in the world. You can ask the technical engineers what is the best design, their recommended design.
I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.
The product’s most valuable feature is security.
Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls work slowly for vulnerability management. Its performance could be faster.
We have been using Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls for five years.
The product is stable. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.
I rate the product’s scalability a nine out of ten.
The technical support services are good. They respond immediately.
Positive
We used FortiGate earlier. We plan to switch again to FortiGate as per our vendor’s preference.
The initial setup process is quite easy. It took less than a month to complete.
I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten.
We evaluated Check Point. We decided to go to Palo Alto for better pricing.
I rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls a nine out of ten.
Our primary use case is for the perimeter connection of our clients in the network. Our client brings their services to their clients, and they have the option to connect to a webpage. With Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls they can safely provide a username and password to their clients.
It is mainly on-premise, because the majority of the clients at this point want that kind of option. But many of them are already asking for the cloud option, like Prisma, for example.
It has improved our clients' organizations because previously the clients did not have the option to fully connect. In this solution, they have the opportunity to add services to their web page and book clients.
The feature that I have found most valuable is the connection. It's very easy for the clients to connect to their information. They use an SSL connection by BPM.
We work very closely with the vendors here and at this point they use external support.
Maybe they could add some tools and more competing services, like servers, but that would increase the cost of the solution.
My company has been using Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls for almost one year. It is new for us. We have more experience with Cisco and Fortinet.
In my company, I am responsible for the development of the proposal that we give to the client. We develop the spectrum and the pricing. We make presentations to the customer to explain the solution and answer questions about it.
The scalability is very strong. The vendor provides has high availability.
Our clients are medium sized businesses.
Palo Alto is not a cheap solution. It is expensive. But because of its technology it pays itself back. In each case we work with the vendor to obtain a major discount for their business. I give that discount to our customer, who benefit from the services that we can bring them.
This is our first dealing with Palo Alto. With other vendors we have more experience, like with Cisco and Fortinet.
Palo Alto's documentation and manuals are very complete. It's very easy to obtain the information that way.
The client still uses Cisco, Fortinet, and Checkpoint. Palo Alto has very good administration tools which is not the case with the others. You can't compare all vendors. Also, the granularity of the information that they can obtain from the firewalls is better.
The initial setup depends. In the case of one client, for example, they have a very complex connection of networks, which is architectural. It is integrated and we need to pick it out and include all the rules that they have and to put in the firewalls which they want to buy in the next month. That kind of job is not easy for us, not just regarding Palo Alto but for other vendors, too.
On a scale of one to ten, I would give Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls a nine.
I would recommend this product to others.
In terms of what advice I would give to future customers looking into implementing Palo Alto Firewalls, I would tell them that they have a good system operator in the firewalls and that it provides many tools that they can use to protect their networks. You don't find that in the other vendors.
We use the solution to secure our Internet traffic and the application traffic from the Internet.
There is also no need to connect to a VPN most of the time.
The payload is a very valuable feature.
The technical support needs improvement.
I have been using Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls for six years.
It is a stable solution.
The deployment takes five to ten minutes.
There are security licenses.
Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.