Palo Alto Networks PA-Series Reviews

We use the solution for Internet Security and VPN. The product is a complete UTM Box, so we also use it for IDS, IPS, advanced security and enabling GlobalProtect service. 

It has a three-layer architecture, and it helps customers to deploy the solution quickly. The product also has an easy-to-use dashboard and user-friendly wizards. So the solution allows easy configuration and monitoring. 

The solution provides good reports in addition to great stability and hardware. Managing this solution is not challenging and doesn't need any expert appointment. The product can be fully managed on your own with some basic knowledge. 

The product's gateway services can be improved. Along with the firewall, if a user wants to work with a VPN and if you want to check the posture of your endpoint, that service needs to be separately purchased. They have this feature, but if this service is clubbed with the solution, it will be very useful for the end users. 

For Mac OS and Apple products, there remains some challenge for VPN; it requires an SSL certificate to be installed separately, and this can be improved. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is very stable, has no bugs and the product is up to date. The support team of this solution is also great, and they are up to the mark, so your money won't go to waste. 

The solution is absolutely scalable for us, as an SMB.

I would rate the customer support a nine out of ten. 

Positive

The solution is easy and fast to deploy. The product can be deployed within a day and requires only one engineer or architect. Maintenance of this product is very easy and user-friendly. This solution can be maintained with basic knowledge and the user doesn't need to be certified like Check Point. This solution can be easily managed with the help of the provided white papers and can also be used very well for analysis. 

This solution can definitely provide a good ROI. 

In comparison to market competition, the price of this solution is great. When compared to Check Point, this product has an affordable and reasonable price. 

I have also used CrowdStrike, Check Point and Cisco. Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is better than them, but this solution's role is different from the other solutions I use. This solution is completely used by us for Internet Security, Check Point is also there for the same purpose, but I was not happy with that product. 

I would definitely recommend others to go for this solution. I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

Our customers use the solution for multiple purposes. Some users use it as a core firewall to protect their servers. Some users use it as a parameter edge to terminate the VPN connection and to connect with their remote site.

The way Palo Alto Networks PA-Series works is completely different compared to other firewalls. The solution is very efficient when it comes to resource usage. We can use multiple processes at a single time. The solution is easy to manage. The most important feature of the solution I like is the reporting. If you want to check your data or traffic usage, you can export it in multiple formats.

Compared to other vendors, the solution's community should be strong enough to solve the problems engineers face. If I face any issue, I should be able to Google it and find the solution to rectify it. If one customer has no premium support, he cannot open a case with the portal. He should at least find some help or support from the community.

I work as a system integrator and have provided Palo Alto Networks PA-Series to customers for three to four years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

Multiple customers from the banking and corporate sectors use Palo Alto Networks PA-Series.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

If you have a proper plan to start the solution's implementation, it's very easy. Since Palo Alto has a free-of-cost converter tool, for which you don't have to buy a license or subscription, it's easy to convert the configuration from other vendors to Palo Alto.

The solution's deployment time depends on the customer's environment, infrastructure, and requirements. A migration takes approximately one month.

Licenses for the malware and the URLs are not free, but converting the configuration is free. You have to purchase the licenses for Palo Alto Networks PA-Series. Compared to other vendors, Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is expensive.

If budget is not a concern, I would highly recommend users use Palo Alto Networks PA-Series.

Overall, I rate Palo Alto Networks PA-Series a seven to eight out of ten.

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.

I use the solution to secure infrastructure boundaries. I use the product as a backend firewall for applications with traffic.

App-ID is a really good feature. The product’s URL filtering features are amazing. The security controls are also very good.

The support provided by the solution is not that good.

I am using the product currently.

The solution is stable. However, I observed some issues I did not expect from a well-known solution like Palo Alto. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

The product has different models, and its high-end models can be scaled easily. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The support is good, but not that good.

Positive

The initial setup is a little tricky. It is not simple and straight.

Except for support, everything else in the product is perfect. If someone is looking for a perfect firewall, they should choose Palo Alto. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We have a hybrid environment where we use a mixture of self hosted PA-Series. IRROLs and the vendor hosted by raws via the Prisma Access Solution. 

The direct profiles is a valuable feature. 

The pricing of the solution needs improvement. 

I have experience using Palo Alto Networks PA-Series. 

I have used Cisco and Fortinet. 

The initial setup of Palo Alto is a tricky one. 

It is a very expensive solution. 

I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company to cater to the needs of our clients, so based on the requirements of the clients, we configure the firewall.

Palo Alto's advantage is that it offers very secure products. Unit 42 in Palo Alto and sandboxing are advantages offered by the product, along with the fact that it provides users with updates every minute, so users keep getting updates. App-ID is the name of a feature in the product that is very good. None of the other firewall products offer the aforementioned features. With the product, the area around NAT is very secure, and users get a lot of options for NAT.

The technical support offered by Palo Alto is an area of concern where improvements are required. It is very difficult to get technical support, which is a very pathetic area. If you try to figure out a solution to your issues with the help of a web browser, it is very difficult to find a proper solution. Other firewall products have proper portals where everything gets published with all the details on how to resolve an issue. There is a need to have a dedicated person or specialist to manage Palo Alto, but getting one is a problem. Overall, the area of technical support is not user-friendly.

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

Some issues are there with the stability part of the solution, but based on the feedback from clients, Palo Alto sends updates like all other solutions. One can say that the tool is mostly stable.

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

It is a scalable solution.

Our company has a strength of 250 employees.

My clients deal with two or three enterprise-sized clients who use Cisco. Small and medium-sized businesses use Palo Alto. Some of our big clients who operate at an enterprise level use Palo Alto.

It is very difficult to get to the product support team, and it takes at least half an hour to get connected with the technical team. I rate the technical support a four out of ten.

Neutral

For deployment, Palo Alto provides a tool that doesn't work properly on many of the systems from Windows, and only the product's previous versions work properly, but the latest versions don't work. Palo Alto offers Limited options to users and allows for easy migration when it comes to products like Cisco, Fortinet, or IBM, but for low-end servers, there are no options to migrate from the tool.

If a large part of a client's workforce operates with cloud services in place, then the solution can be deployed on the cloud. Nowadays, most people are moving to the cloud.

The time required to deploy the solution depends on the firewall size and configuration, but I know that it requires at least a month.

Our company has around 14 members from the network security side involved in the deployment process.

Price-wise, Palo Alto offers high-price products. It is mostly the enterprise-sized customers who prefer to use Palo Alto products. Recently, Palo Alto launched Palo Alto Networks PA-400, which is much cheaper than the other products on the market. My company has to make yearly payments or opt for a three-year payment when it comes to the charges associated with the licensing model of the product. The clients of the tool need to procure the license for the premium support. Almost all the vendors of firewall products follow the aforementioned steps nowadays when it comes to the licensing model.

Considering the presence scenario, I can suggest Fortinet since I found its products doing well in business. Support and configuration-wise, Fortinet is better than Palo Alto, but technology-wise, Palo Alto is the number one product in the market. Fortinet is much more user-friendly than Palo Alto.

The tool is not very easy to maintain, but people go for it since it is a secure product. Only those who know about Firewall products can maintain the solution.

Some of our company's clients have migrated from Palo Alto Networks PA-Series to FortiGate or Fortinet since it is very easy to manage with a very user-friendly UI.

Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is a good solution, but someone in the organization should manage it since it is not a very user-friendly tool. If you want to configure something, you need to know how Palo Alto Networks PA-Series works and also know about what architecture is and all. Other firewall products can be easily configured since very user-friendly GUIs are made available to users. Checking logs in Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is very difficult. If someone knows how to check logs, then it's fine because otherwise, it's very difficult.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

The solution is used for security and IoT security.

The solution's licensing price could be improved. The solution's GUI should be user-friendly and easily configurable.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks PA-Series for the last three years.

I rate Palo Alto Networks PA-Series a seven out of ten for stability.

The solution's scalability is not very good. Around 300 users use the solution in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

The solution's technical support is good.

I have also worked with Fortinet and SonicWall.

The solution's initial setup is a little complex compared to other solutions.

It takes two to three hours to deploy the solution.

We have to pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution.

I would recommend Palo Alto Networks PA-Series to other users.

Overall, I rate Palo Alto Networks PA-Series a seven out of ten.

The tool's most valuable feature is WildFire. 

Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is expensive. We would like to see additional threat hunting features. 

I have been working with the product for more than five years. 

The product is stable. 

My company has 1000 users for Palo Alto Networks PA-Series. 

Palo Alto Networks PA-Series' support is very quick. 

Positive

We used Cisco before the Palo Alto Networks PA-Series. We chose the product because of its community. 

Palo Alto Networks PA-Series' deployment was easy and took one to two days to complete. My company has two to three administrators to manage the product. 

The tool's pricing was reasonable when we bought the product. We pay around 60,000 dollars per year. 

We evaluated Check Point, McAfee, and Fortinet. We chose Palo Alto Networks PA-Series because of its performance, pricing, and technical support. 

You need to do a POC before choosing the product. I rate it ten out of ten.