Palo Alto Networks PA-Series Reviews

The resolution of the Palo Alto is very good. It is a well-known product in protection from an outside perspective. We use the solution for major or minor attacks. Also, it provides defence, security, and URL filtering. It is excellent in terms of security. It assures me against network threats.

Palo Alto should integrate artificial intelligence for security purposes in the background for well-known threats and new risks coming to the market.

Additionally, they could introduce a central dashboard where we can centrally monitor and mitigate all the risks automatically.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks PA-Series for six to eight years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

More than 300 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

We used Sony Firewall, but later on, we switched to Palo Alto because it is a popular security brand.

The initial setup depends on many policies, but it is not very difficult because we have been using it for more than eight years. It is not very complicated, but you need expertise for security.

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten, where one is expensive and ten is cheap.

We have third-party support for the Palo Alto equipment. We call the implementation partner only whenever we need configuration information or changes. They make changes for us. We have not been directly involved with OEM for any support.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

There are various use cases, particularly for desktop scenarios. One of them involves exploring contacts. Virtual firewall use cases revolve around different scenarios, such as transitioning to the cloud. For instance, when Barclays uses Azure or AWS, there's a focus on meeting security obligations and implementing threat prevention to comply with regulations like GDPR or PPA. This includes creating segmentation to align with regulatory standards. As part of this process, security features available in cloud platforms like virtual firewalls and threat prevention are incorporated.

After the implementation here, especially since I work in the data center, I've noticed the significance of security. For example, Veeam, CDL, and other aspects became crucial, especially during the COVID period when users started working from home. 

This situation led to numerous blocks, and user profiles were getting blocked due to issues with IP addresses ending up on blocklists. However, after implementing the 3M series virtual firewall, we were able to effectively manage security for our cloud applications, like those in AWS. This enabled us to monitor remote workers and take necessary actions, such as blocking problematic IP addresses. Consequently, we reduced the number of tickets raised with ISP providers.      

A valuable feature that we can consider is the deployment time, which is significantly reduced, almost 90% faster compared to other solutions. This leads to quicker deployment and less downtime.

I have found that the tool works well for me, but there are areas where security testing and protection could be improved, especially in virtual or cloud environments. However, in this project, once we deployed it, we haven't encountered any issues.

The cost is currently manageable, but as we migrate fully into the cloud, additional features like capacity upgrading and improvements to hardware resources will be necessary, especially since our equipment consists of older-generation switches and routers. I'm looking for additional capabilities in these areas.

I've been working on my current project for more than two years now.

I would rate it 9 out of 10. 

I would rate it 8.5 out of 10. 

The deployment is quite straightforward, and it's faster than it used to be. This means that the deployment process is quicker, and there is less downtime involved.

From my perspective, managing the price is important, especially because we're a small business. For larger organizations like Barclays, we provide our requirements to the client, and they place the order on BigFix. It's their responsibility to consider their budget and make decisions accordingly. We appreciate the features we get, but the cost-sharing still depends on the client.

The client needs to provide approval for the POCs used by our team; it's not within my control.

When evaluating options, we should consider team members who are knowledgeable in supporting next-generation firewalls like NGFW. We also need to factor in the specific product offerings. For instance, if we have options like the PA-440, PA-850, and PA-8350, we should compare their prices and features. It's important to make decisions based on the situation and the needs of the organization.

Considering factors like availability and the specific situation, I would rate this an eight. It's important to explore other potential cases as well.

There are various use cases, particularly for desktop scenarios. One of them involves exploring contacts. Virtual firewall use cases revolve around different scenarios, such as transitioning to the cloud. For instance, when Barclays uses Azure or AWS, there's a focus on meeting security obligations and implementing threat prevention to comply with regulations like GDPR or PPA. This includes creating segmentation to align with regulatory standards. As part of this process, security features available in cloud platforms like virtual firewalls and threat prevention are incorporated.

After the implementation here, especially since I work in the data center, I've noticed the significance of security. For example, Veeam, CDL, and other aspects became crucial, especially during the COVID period when users started working from home. This situation led to numerous blocks, and user profiles were getting blocked due to issues with IP addresses ending up on blocked lists. However, after implementing the 3M series virtual firewall, we were able to effectively manage security for our cloud applications, like those in AWS. This enabled us to monitor remote workers and take necessary actions, such as blocking problematic IP addresses. Consequently, we reduced the number of tickets raised with ISP providers.        

A valuable feature that we can consider is the deployment time, which is significantly reduced. It is almost 90% faster compared to other solutions. This leads to quicker deployment and less downtime.

I have found that the tool works well for me, but there are areas where security testing and protection could be improved, especially in virtual or cloud environments. However, in this project, once we deployed it, we haven't encountered any issues.

The cost is currently manageable, but as we migrate fully into the cloud, additional features like capacity upgrading and improvements to hardware resources will be necessary, especially since our equipment consists of older-generation switches and routers. So, I'm looking for additional capabilities in these areas.

I've been working on my current project for more than two years now.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten. 

The deployment is quite straightforward, and it's faster than it used to be. This means that there is less downtime involved.

From my perspective, managing the price is important, especially because we're a small business. For larger organizations like Barclays, we provide our requirements to the client, and they place the order on BigFix. It's their responsibility to consider their budget and make decisions accordingly. We appreciate the features we get, but the cost-sharing still depends on the client.

The client needs to provide approval for the POCs used by our team; it's not within my control.

When evaluating options, you should consider team members who are knowledgeable in supporting next-generation firewalls like NGFW. We also need to factor in the specific product offerings. For instance, if we have options like the PA-440, PA-850, and PA-8350, we should compare their prices and features. It's important to make decisions based on the situation and the needs of the organization.

Considering factors like availability and the specific situation, I would rate this an eight. It's important to explore other potential cases as well.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use Palo Alto Networks firewalls for our perimeter security defense.

We use it for threat prevention in our networks. Check permission, advanced URL filtering, and DNS security. There are different subscriptions, and we are actually using them all. 

We are really satisfied with the firewall's throughput and its threat prevention performance regarding network traffic. We can easily decrypt our SSL traffic and thanks to the technology named App-ID, it recognizes network protocols without relying on port numbers.

It operates at Layer 7, and its ability to recognize protocols even if they use a default port for another protocol is impressive. It alerts you to such anomalies. 

The single-pass architecture technology is particularly noteworthy because it allows for the addition of new functions to existing hardware without any performance degradation, even when all modules, like self-encrypted encryption, malware protection, threat protection, and industrial filtering, are enabled. This results in outstanding performance.

That's why we use Palo Alto Networks in our IT firm and recommend their devices to all our customers.

We also have functions related to network visibility and control. We use Panorama controllers, which operate in a geographically distributed architecture, allowing us to easily control, configure, and manage network devices. 

With single-touch provisioning, you can effortlessly add new files to your Panorama VM. It offers extensive features that we currently use.

Panorama is a Palo Alto Networks product optimized for firewalls. As for integration, we can easily integrate the PA-Series with popular brands, switches, and routers like Cisco, Extreme Networks, or HP Aruba across your local area network's switches and routers, enhancing application-based policy enforcement.

It offers  application-based policy enforcement. Palo Alto Networks firewalls help us recognize protocol anomalies, contrasting with other vendors that may require policies based on port numbers. 

With Palo Alto Networks, the port number isn't a constraint because their devices handle protocol traffic at Layer 7, allowing for accurate identification of protocol usage and port numbers.  They can identify which protocol actually uses which port. So, if there's an unplanned issue, like, for example, a hacker trying to create a DNS tunnel using a non-standard port (like 1536 instead of the usual 53), Palo Alto's Endpoint UI will easily detect it and allow you to take measures.

PA-Series includes built-in network packet brokers, a valuable feature as it allows SSL traffic to be decrypted just once. If you need to inspect this decrypted traffic further, there's no need for a third-party solution—Palo Alto Networks firewalls handle it themselves. 

In future releases, maybe Palo Alto can enhance and enlarge their portfolio with SIEM solutions. They already have an endpoint protection solution, SOAR solution, that's fine. 

But when it comes to standalone IDS/IPS solution or email security solution, for example, we don't have any product in that category for Palo Alto.

I have been using it for two years. 

It's very reliable. Even if you have only one firewall, failures are rare. Moreover, the high availability feature allows two firewalls to sync with each other for continuous operation, ensuring stability.

The customer service and support are good. Both local and global support teams are readily accessible and they report back in a short period. I've never encountered any issues with their support.

Positive

The setup's ease depends on your experience and the resources at hand, like Palo Alto Networks' documentation. With the right information, it's not a problem.

For me, the deployment took around 30 minutes. 

Many people think Palo Alto firewalls are expensive, but I don't feel that way. Let's compare it with Fortinet firewalls.

With Fortinet, every two or three years, the firewall generation changes, and they have limited support for older devices. But with Palo Alto, you still get support from the vendor for seven or eight years.

Also, many vendors prepare data sheets for their firewalls with most features disabled. For example, they might say their firewall has 20 gigabit throughput, but they don't mention if threat prevention or service encryption is on or off. With Palo Alto, even when you enable all the modules, it still provides the exact throughput they advertise.

If you're buying two firewalls, one from Fortinet and one from Palo Alto, both rated at 20 gigabit throughput, and you enable all the modules on the Fortinet one, it might downgrade to 10 or even 5 gigabit throughput. But with Palo Alto and all security modules enabled, you still get the full 20 gigabit throughput.

That's the key difference. That's why customers trust Palo Alto, and that's why it's a big player in network security.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

In our AWS deployments, we are utilizing Palo Alto firewalls to establish secure transit connections between two distinct AWS regions or locations. Within our AWS environment, we also host several critical services. Our primary objective is to enhance the security of these services.

The most valuable aspects are the App ID feature and its policy configuration capabilities, along with two other important features, specific feature management and CPU planning. These features have proven incredibly beneficial for our organization. They help us maintain stability in the network when issues arise, such as network congestion. Also, the data transfer between Virtual Service Providers has been seamless, and the standard S3 upgrade process has been impressive.

I encountered a slight issue with the application portal, which was not functioning correctly. Enhancing its performance would be highly beneficial.

I have been working with it for three years now.

It provides good stability capabilities.

It offers robust scalability features, suitable for accommodating over a thousand users in my company.

When comparing Palo Alto with other firewall solutions I've worked with, Palo Alto stands out as a superior choice. It offers a seamless transition from one option to another, making it exceptionally versatile and user-friendly in an enterprise setting.

The initial setup is notably simpler compared to other firewall solutions. When comparing it to other firewalls like FCD, ASA, or vendors like TechPoint, Palo Alto's setup process is much more straightforward.

While other firewalls may come with a higher cost, when you consider the cost in relation to the services and features that Palo Alto offers, it is clear that Palo Alto is delivering excellent value.

When considering an organization's needs, I strongly lean toward Palo Alto due to its flexibility. Its user interface is notably more user-friendly compared to other options and the way it handles data is impressive. The integration capabilities with products like XDR and Prisma for cloud deployments are excellent. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

I use the solution in my company to protect our networks.

My company provides Palo Alto Networks PA-Series to our customers. My company takes care of the product's integration part for our customers.

The most valuable features of the solution are its areas like performance and stability.

The product is perfect, in my opinion. The product's high prices are an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks PA-Series for seven years. My company operates as a system integrator for Palo Alto Networks. My company also has a partnership with Palo Alto Networks.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The product is suitable for enterprise-sized companies.

I have contacted the solution's technical support. I rate the technical support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

I have deployed the product in a multi-site environment.

The product's initial setup process was simple.

The product's deployment and configuration phases are easy.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Not too much time is required to deploy the product.

The product is offered to users at high prices compared to the pricing model of the other vendors in the market.

I feel that Palo Alto Networks PA-Series offers better performance when compared to the other vendors in the market.

I don't have many details about the product's application control and visibility features since I had to deal with a lot of features in the tool during the deployment of the solution for our company's customers.

The tool is good enough to deal with cyberattacks and meet the requirements of our company's customers.

Considering the product's usability and user interface, I would say that it is easy to use the tool.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

In our network security architecture, we utilize the PA-Series firewalls by integrating them seamlessly. Migration from Cisco to PA-Series was surprisingly easy, and we have centralized management using Panorama.

The most effective features for threat prevention in the PA-Series are its integration with Cortex and the use of machine learning AI for advanced threat detection. These capabilities, especially present in the newer generation firewalls like the PA-4000 series, enhance our security posture significantly.

Migrating from old to new Palo Alto Networks firewalls can sometimes encounter hiccups, and there is room for improvement in streamlining this process for smoother transitions.

I have been working with Palo Alto Networks PA-Series for nine years.

I would rate the stability of the product as a nine out of ten. We have not faced any issues with it.

I would rate the scalability of the product as a nine out of ten. We have approximately 3,000 end users.

I have had a great experience with Palo Alto Networks technical support. Response time and quality have been excellent, especially for RMA cases. Any issues, whether for functionality or hardware, were resolved quickly. I would rate the support as a nine out of ten.

Positive

Palo Alto Networks stands out from other solutions because they consistently strive to innovate and stay ahead of the curve. Their user-friendly interface and customizable security options make them a top choice. Additionally, they offer a wide range of security solutions without forcing you to invest in unnecessary features, similar to SecurePoint's approach with blades.

The initial setup of Palo Alto Networks PA-Series was straightforward, especially with prior network and security knowledge and a helpful training course. The intuitive web UI made the process comfortable, and overall, Palo Alto Networks seems to be heading in the right direction with user experience improvements.

I have experience deploying and managing PA-Series firewalls in a multi-site environment, including international locations connected via MPLS. We use them for perimeter security and have centralized management through Panorama. Deploying and managing them across sites has been straightforward and effective which makes Palo Alto Networks a preferred choice for our network security needs.

The PA-Series has consistently helped us prevent cyber-attacks through its threat prevention and vulnerability profiles. By configuring security profiles effectively, including antivirus and threat prevention, we have successfully mitigated various threats.

Overall, I would rate Palo Alto Networks PA-Series as a nine out of ten.

My company operates at multiple sites. My company has multiple work-related departments, and for each department, we have multiple servers along with multiple printers and other devices. My organization has to restrict certain accesses based on company policies. Generally, my company has to look after what accesses are to be allowed and which are not to be allowed, based on source and destination. If some business cases require some access, then our company allows access for those on the firewall.

Palo Alto Networks generally offers some very good features, like antivirus, DLP, URL filtering, and dynamic blocking. All the attributes offered by Palo Alto Networks are quite good and fall under the next-generation firewall features.

With Palo Alto Networks, every two or three months, there are some updates or bug fixes that happen. Everything is good with Palo Alto Networks.

With Palo Alto Networks PA-Series, I find that the support team takes a long time to resolve the issues that a user may face during the use of the product. You need to keep describing your issues to the support team since Palo Alto Networks usually provides you with a few engineers who then connect you with another set of engineers, making it a long process. When it comes to the support offered by Palo Alto Networks, our company has seen that we need to escalate an issue to senior management, which takes a lot of time. The support part of the product can improve a little bit.

I have experience with Palo Alto Networks PA-Series. My company has a partnership with Palo Alto Networks. I use the solution's recent version, which is PAN-OS 10.0.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

More than 5,000 people in our company use Palo Alto Networks PA-Series.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

Earlier, my company was involved with Cisco ASA Firewall and Check Point Software.

The product's initial setup was easy.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

If you are involved in the initial configuration part, then the deployment process related to the product may take around two or three hours.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.