Palo Alto Networks VM-Series Reviews

Primary use case is network protection, next-generation IDS, and IPS protection.

• It provides better protection.
• There is seamless integration.
• It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are.

The next-generation features of its IDS and IPS.

The product could provide protection above Layer 3, which gets into the application layer and provides better visibility into those aspects of application security. This would be very helpful. This way, there would be one tool that we could continue using.

The data aspects of data security and data loss prevention could provide visibility which would be very useful.

It is stable. We haven't had any issues and don't think about the stability.

One of the great features that we liked and selected it was its  scalability. We can autoscale and put it in Auto Scaling groups, which is very useful.

We have hardly any issues. We have had some patches of data needing some help, but that was it, and the technical support has been spot on.

Integration on on our AWS environment was one of the points that we liked about it.

We used technical support in the initial stages when we were setting it up and configuring some of the features. We used their Professional Services, who were very useful.

We have already seen ROI. 

We continue using it, because the concept was at six months, we should receive value back out of it. If the value is seen, only then would we continue using it. It is two years later, and we still continue using it.

Because the solution was getting deployed on AWS, it was the best place to go and it was available there.

One of the factors for selecting Palo Alto was they had flexible pricing. They had a pay-as-you-go model. Comparable to other products, such as Check Point, the price point was definitely a plus. It was expensive but it was comparable.

We looked at Palo Alto, Check Point, Fortinet, and some other vendors.

We chose Palo Alto because its features, especially its advanced features from the IDS and IPS. We were existing customers with Palo Alto from the on-premise side along with the integration aspects of its hardware.

Identify a use case first of all. If the use case is a match, then use the product.

We use it in the cloud for both AWS and non-AWS versions. The AWS version is far better. It works seamlessly and integrates very well with some other services. 

We have integrated it with Splunk for the security aspects and with identity and access management for configuration purposes. 

We use it to protect applications and data on AWS.

Embedding it into my application development lifecycle prevents data loss and business disruption, allowing the adoption to operate at the speed of my AWS Cloud.

It prevents data loss and business disruption.

It can definitely improve on the performance.

I would like more scalability included on the next release.

It has a good performance which helps you with the stability of your virtual environment.

It has to be more scalable for the deployment of VMs on the cloud.

You have to be an expert administrator of a virtual environment to know how to integrate it with your AWS environment.

Purchasing through the AWS Marketplace is a secure way to purchase this solution. Our organization chose to procure this solution via the AWS Marketplace because we have clients who were interested in the solution. Also, for out proof of concept, we decided to purchase it.

The pricing and licensing of this product on AWS should be from $1.28/hr or $4,500.00/yr. Then, it would be a good price for the performance that it delivers.

It solves several challenges protecting your AWS workloads with good security features, delivering superior visibility, control, and threat prevention at the application level when compared to other cloud-oriented security solutions.

I have not tried integrating Palo Alto with other products.

I use Palo Alto Networks VM-Series for testing purposes of VMs.

The main advantage of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series stems from the fact that you can access it with the help of cloud services.

With Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, it is hard for me to manage its network configuration part. Regarding Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, I am figuring out whether to use interzone or intrazone networks for the VMs in our company's environment, which is very confusing. The aforementioned aspects of the solution can be considered for improvement.

In the future, whenever I try to onboard Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, it should allow for easy configuration, especially in terms of network connectivity. I want an easier setup and configuration in the product's future releases.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks VM-Series for around a year. My company has a partnership with Palo Alto Networks.

The technical support of Palo Alto Networks does reply to the cases or issues I file with the support team. The support is equally good for all the products that fall under Palo Alto Networks. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I rate the implementation process a six or seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

During the implementation process of the product, I faced some issues related to the networking part and connectivity of VMs. I faced issues with how an end user could connect the VMs to a firewall or connect a firewall to VMs, but the same process was easy for me on a physical device firewall.

I am more comfortable with the physical device firewall. I am actually trying to figure out things since I am not very familiar with the VM side of Palo Alto.

I would recommend Palo Alto Networks VM-Series since it is a cheaper product compared to the other tools available in the market. Apart from Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, I usually recommend Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and Palo Alto Networks Prisma Cloud.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

• To do a lot of intrusion detection.
• Threat prevention.
• As an application firewall, to be able to securely deliver apps to the public.

It gives us the ease that we are secure. We have set up the proper things that help make our data safe. This is the biggest benefit.

It offers a single pane of glass for all the different types of installations.

The easy of use is pretty good.

I would like a way to do everything programmatically, or be able to copy the configs from different prices at different levels.

The stability is excellent. We have about 50 to 60 employees on it per day. Then, we have about 100 edge connected devices coming through it as well.

It is definitely scalable. We have about 100 users with about 200 to 300 instances on the cloud that we protect.

The technical support is really good. It is usually one phone call to get everything done if we are having an issue.

We chose to purchase Palo Alto through the AWS Marketplace because we needed an easy to use firewall and a way to protect our public applications and services.

The integration and configuration on our AWS environment was pretty simple. We did not have to ask any questions about anything on it, so it was good.

We haven't had any security issues since deploying it.

Purchasing on the AWS Marketplace was simple, effective, and easy.

The price is not bad. They have a yearly renewal fee, and the pricing is exactly where we expect it to be.

We also evaluated Fortinet, but Palo Alto is sort of the new up and coming product. There were a lot of good recommendations from other security experts.

In addition, Palo Alto is easier to configure when you are building policies on applications. 

Talk to their technical services to make sure you are getting the right size solution for what you want to do.

The product is easy use. I don't have to think twice when I am using it. I know it is doing its job. Customer support has been great.

We are using both the AWS and on-premise versions. Both versions are about the same. The interface is nice and easy to configure. I like that it seems like it is one platform to manage.

The most effective features for threat prevention are application-based prevention and WildFire. These features cover various threats, such as ransomware, malware, etc. They provide real-time visibility. By applying appropriate policies, threats can be blocked.

The solution needs to improve its visibility. It's not straightforward to use. Understanding the policies, authorizations, and initializing features requires careful review. The product needs to offer proper training. 

I have been working with the product for three to four months. 

I rate Palo Alto Networks VM-Series' stability as ten out of ten. 

The main issue with the tool's support is the delayed response time, ranging from one to two hours. This delay can impact customers who are waiting for support. Additionally, partners may become busy. 

Positive

The tool's improvement in cloud security posture depends on the features used and the licenses purchased. Different suites are available, such as Professional, Core, and Enterprise, each offering various features for endpoint.

Competitors such as Fortinet and Check Point also offer similar features, but I don't know much about their offerings. However, Palo Alto Network VM-Series stands out with its application deployment capability, iOS zone protection, and features like application ID, user ID, and device ID identification. These features enable policy application and on-premises protection, which may not be available in competing solutions.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. 

We use Palo Alto Networks VM-Series for our company's customers, especially those who use Azure Firewall to secure their environment but still want a third-party firewall from companies like Fortinet FortiGate and Palo Alto in their environment. Whenever our company's customers want to opt for a third-party firewall, we suggest firewall products from companies like Fortinet FortiGate and Palo Alto. There have been cases where our company's customer who already uses firewall products from Fortinet FortiGate and Palo Alto deployed on an on-premises model want to shift the same product to the cloud, going on the good experience they have had with the products. If our company's customers are not interested in purchasing a third-party firewall, my company suggests the cloud-native firewall provided by Azure, specifically for their landing zone environment.

Regarding Palo Alto, my company normally does a high availability configuration for our customers, which are active-active and active-passive. There are multiple add-on packages a customer can choose from in Palo Alto, including antivirus, web filtering, IDS, and IPS solutions.

Considering Azure, some customers may purchase Palo Alto Networks VM-300. Considering the pricing perspective, customers want multiple NIC types because they might have different spokes, and they may like to extend it with different interfaces on different spokes. Considering VM-Series on Azure Virtual Machines, since there is a limitation when it comes to Azure VM-300 as it supports only four cores, there may be some modifications made to support more cores.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks VM-Series for three to four years. My company functions as a managed service provider and an integrator for Palo Alto Networks.

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series can be made more stable. I have seen some bugs in the solution. After deployment with an API call, you can use an HA solution in two scenarios, namely, as a load balancer and for API calls. I see that in the Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, there are some delays when it comes to an API call configuration.

It is a scalable tool. Considering the licensing part of the solution, it may not seem scalable, especially when you want to move from Palo Alto Networks VM-300 to Palo Alto Networks VM-500 since, for such a procedure, the virtual machines will have to be brought down and registered again with a different license, which is challenging.

My company's customers who use the solution are mostly enterprise-sized businesses.

The solution's technical support has been good. I rate the technical support a seven and a half to eight out of ten.

There are some delays that I have observed when my company communicates with Palo Alto's support engineers. There are also some problems related to the understanding of our company's issues with the product by Palo Alto's support team.

Positive

Users are provided with templates to go ahead with the deployment phase of Azure. There are already prepared templates available for installation, which users can use during installation.

Suppose our company's discussions with the customers are completed, and the design has been frozen. Considering the aforementioned case, the Palo Alto Networks VM-Series installation phase can be completed in a couple of hours, while the only time-consuming task is the creation of policies.

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is easy to maintain.

From a security point of view, I find Palo Alto Networks VM-Series to be a better product compared to the other solutions in the market.

I rate the overall product a ten out of ten.

For this VM in particular, it is microsegmentation which is used for implementing the firewall inside the data center.

When talking about the VM or the virtual firewall, it is mostly about the sessioncapacities that it can handle. In the early version of the firewall, the session or traffic that it could inspect was low. 

In quite a few releases, they have improved a lot. They started with the physical firewall, therefore it is almost virtually the same firewall with the same features, only that it is a virtual one. The main improvements that they have made are surrounding the processing capacity for the virtual machines.

The granularity which is used to confirm applications based in users. 

When you have VMware NSX, it is easy to deploy this virtual firewall because it is fully integrated with the VM solution. If I want to segment any type of network inside the data center, it is about two or three clicks, and it works.

The reporting. There are various reports that come with the box or with VMware, but you can only run them daily. If you want to generate a report from this week or the past month, you have to create a custom report. It is not that difficult, but I expect these reports to be pre-made. I would like to be able to choose the dates that I can run the reports. As of now, you can only run it for the day before, so this is one improvement they need to make. 

From time to time, maybe twice a year, they have released content updates which have some issues. When they release content updates, the applications with these updates give us a false positives. I manage older software developers and members, and almost everyone has one or two missteps a year regarding these updates.

The Series 2000 version of Palo Alto were somewhat big for small or medium customers. They did not have a middle box. 

In the newer version (3850s), all of them are scalable. They fit better into medium or small businesses, so it is easy for us. E.g, if we have a VMware 500 appliance, we can upgrade it to a 100. They have improved in this way.

The technical support is extremely good. They are a 10 out of 10, not only because of their fast response time, but their knowledgeable personnel as well. They have knowledge regarding very specific issues. 

When we finish creating tickets in the support portal, there are a lot of knowledge-based documents. They answer almost immediately, calling you back about 10 minutes later. When creating a support ticket, I always get a quick answer.

I was using Cisco, but I was using the old Cisco. The firewall was the only working protocol. The Palo Alto Network Firewall is a Next-Generation Firewall, so it is a lot different. 

This is the first and only Next-Generation Firewall that I have used. I have put in several Sophos Firewalls, but they are not the same as Palo Alto.

You will need to know what are you doing with the firewall. 

It's different than Sophos or Fortinet where you only need to click two or three times, and it puts you in engaged mode in the simplest way. 

With Palo Alto, you need to know where you are going to be implementing and what architectures you want. It is not complicated, but it is not as easy as Sophos or Fortinet, because when you start with these two firewalls, the quick setup wizard chooses for you and it automatically creates for you network rules.

With Palo Alto, you need to do all those steps manually, but it is somewhat better because it gives you the flexibility to choose how you want your network set up and how you are going to segment the networks.

I know Palo Alto is not cheap because my finance team has been telling me that it is not a cheap solution. It is about the maturity of your security team or infrastructure team and whom you want to work with no matter how big your organization is: small, medium, or large.

The newest version of Cisco, the Next-Generation Firewall, is less expensive than Palo Alto. The price is more comparable to Check Point.

For licensing, it depends how you want to use the firewall. The firewall can be used only for IPS purposes. If you only want that firewall IPS, you will only need a license called threat prevention which includes vulnerabilities, antivirus signatures, and one additional measure; it includes three measures and security updates. 

If you do not want to buy the threat prevention license in the box, you can buy it with only the support license which is for the support of the hardware. It works like a simple firewall. It integrates what it calls user IDs and application IDs. If you do not buy any other license, only the firewall, Palo Alto will also help you improve your security.

We evaluated VanGuard for their Next-Generation Firewall.

We chose between Check Point and Palo Alto for their support teams. Check Point is very bad for support. We switched from Check Point to Palo Alto.

If you do not have a Next-Generation Firewall, Palo Alto is a good choice. It is reliable and the support is very good. The VMware version is in all the boxes and they use the same OS, so it is not different if you manage a physical box or a virtual box. The only difference is the virtual box depends on where it will be placed, and its main usage is for microsegmentation and data center firewalls.

We use it for firewall purposes.

We use it mostly for the firewall and its ability to work in AWS. That is why we like it.

AWS has improved our agility to apply firewall rules. It has reduced the amount of time that it takes to apply firewall rules because everything is based in the cloud. It helps us to bring agility to the project teams when applying them.

We still need to understand what are the best practices which we need to implement. 

We also don't know how it will scale once we start putting more load on it.

We like its stability.

We are happy with the scalability. 

We just started migrating to the cloud. Thus, we are slowly adding more volume to it. Maybe next year, we should know how it is scaling in the cloud.

We have in-house experts and a good relationship with the Palo Alto technical support team.

We were using a lot of Cisco firewalls before. We switched because we wanted what works best in the cloud.

We have been happy with the configuration and implementation on the AWS environment.

It takes the bottleneck away from the information security teams and increases their agility on projects. 

We found purchasing process the product on the AWS Marketplace to be very good. We used the AWS Marketplace because we were set to move to AWS. We rely on Amazon and their partners to process our research.

I would recommend to try it out.