Palo Alto Networks WildFire Reviews

We primarily use the product for on-site protection through Palo Alto's XDR, which triggers scans for potential malicious files in network traffic and endpoints.

The product integration with third-party systems need improvement. 

I have been indirectly working with Palo Alto Networks WildFire for about six years through our integration with Palo Alto's XDR and firewall technologies.

I would rate the overall stability as a ten. It has been consistently reliable in our operations.

Around 8,000 to 9,000 users in our large enterprise utilize Palo Alto Networks WildFire.

While the support services are generally good, there are times when obtaining granular information or specific technical expertise can be challenging, especially without the premium support package.

The deployment was seamless for us, as it is integrated as part of the SaaS solution without requiring additional dedicated hardware.

The platform has reduced operational costs by approximately 25% to 30% due to its robust threat detection capabilities.

Palo Alto Networks solutions are typically on the higher end of pricing, but considering the value and integration with our existing infrastructure, it is worth the investment.

The automated scanning capabilities integrated with Palo Alto's XDR are crucial for detecting and responding to potential environmental threats.

Integration with other solutions outside the Palo Alto ecosystem can sometimes be limited, as it prefers to keep operations within its ecosystem.

It has robust cybersecurity capabilities. I recommend it to others and rate it a nine.

I use the tool in my company for advanced threat protection and for configuring the firewall policy. I also use GlobalProtect VPN, along with IPsec.

The product fails to offer protection when dealing with high-severity vulnerabilities, making it an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have experience with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, but I don't use it much. My company has been a customer of the product since 2016 or 2017.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Around 1,000 people in my company use the product.

The solution's technical support is good, but my company prefers to use vendor support, which is not that much useful. My company plans to receive direct support from Palo Alto Networks.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The solution can be deployed in a day.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is a product with a high price. My company pays separately to use Palo Alto Networks WildFire. The cost of the product is very high, but my company is okay with it.

My company had evaluated other products in the market before choosing Palo Alto Networks WildFire. My company chose Palo Alto Networks WildFire since it is very compatible with the firewall we use from Palo Alto Networks, making it an easy solution for us to implement in our environment.

Though the product has improved the ability to detect and respond to genuine threats, it is not very useful in our company's environment.

The tool's capability to deal with malicious files and block URLs has benefited our organization. The tool also helps my company deal with scripts that are not required.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is only for the users who use hardware or products from Palo Alto Networks. I am not sure whether Palo Alto Networks WildFire can be integrated with other products. If you use a firewall from Palo Alto Networks, then Palo Alto Networks WildFire is useful since it allows you to stay protected from malware.

Only the reporting part is proper in the product, but the action setting is an area that needs to be taken care of by Palo Alto Networks. If the product is capable of blocking threats, then it will be very useful for our company.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

Most competitors call themselves a layer seven inspection device yet are not in the true sense able to do this task as well as Palo Alto. Some require additional subscriptions to enable their version of a layer seven inspection service.

Details as to how that accomplishes the tasks of layer seven inspections, how often their updates are published and available to the public, their method of publishing these updates to protect the internal production traffic, and the cost of the subscription, if required to fulfill the layer seven protection, should be asked of all vendors being considered.

I have worked as a VAR and an MSSP and know that the labor cost of Palo Alto is much lower than its competition in every way.

I can say with confidence, that when compared, the firewall that stands above the rest is the Palo Alto. My 20 years of experience working with firewalls and 20 years of network experience provide me with a well-rounded view of firewalls and the networks they are protecting.

I highly recommend the Palo Alto Networks WildFire as it is the best device in
comparison to other network products in the marketplace.

I have had only one matter of concern. Many years back an update caused an issue with the firewall. However, Palo Alto not only informed us of said issue, they also sent an update that fixed the issue before I even had time to log in to determine if the issue affected our services.

Wildfire is subscription-based in order to submit and get responses, however, a SOC costs money and all the input keeps the protection fresh.

I love the idea of Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It's more geared toward preventing malware. If someone's laptop or phone is malware-infected, the tool prevents it from uploading valuable corporate data outside the corporate network. That's what I love about Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It stops malware in its tracks.

I didn't experience any pain points in Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It's good "as is".

In terms of what I'd like to see in the next release of Palo Alto Networks WildFire, each release is based on malware that has been identified. The key problem is an average of six months from the time malware is written to the time it's discovered and a signature is created for it. The only advice that I can give is for them to shorten that timeframe. I don't know how they would do it, but if they shorten that, for example, cut it in half, they'll make themselves more famous.

Stability in Palo Alto Networks WildFire is significantly better, compared to other solutions.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire, in terms of scalability, is significantly good, though you have to right-size or plan for the future for group capacity. A lot of the Palo Alto solutions, especially the chassis-based or the "non-fixed" solutions give you the ability to scale on port density, and I like that.

Technical support for Palo Alto Networks WildFire is good.

Setting up Palo Alto Networks WildFire is much more straightforward, especially when compared to Cisco.

I use Palo Alto Networks WildFire. I like it.

The number of people you need for maintaining Palo Alto Networks WildFire will depend on the number of devices you have. If you had one firewall, what do you need to maintain? You'll just need one guy, and he's going to be bored most of the time. One guy could maintain ten to twenty firewalls. If you have one hundred firewalls on your network, or you manage one hundred firewalls for your customers, then you're going to need five times as many engineers for maintaining Palo Alto Networks WildFire.

I have no advice for others looking into using the solution because it's so simple. You can turn it on with a button, then there's a radio box, then you click it, and away you go. If you need information, you can enter a support email, and it'll fire off an email saying, "I caught something. I shut it down, but you should know about this."

Nobody gets a ten, so I'll give Palo Alto Networks WildFire a rating of nine out of ten.

In our company, Palo Alto Networks WildFire is seamlessly integrated with our firewall, working automatically to detect and prevent zero-day attacks. It is like having an extra layer of defense that kicks in whenever there is a potential security threat. My role mainly involves managing firewall policies and configurations, while WildFire handles the more intricate aspects of threat detection and analysis.

WildFire has significantly enhanced our organization's ability to detect and respond to new threats, especially phishing attacks. It serves as a comprehensive repository of security incidents, providing us with a vast database of threat intelligence. With WildFire in place, we feel more confident and relaxed, knowing that even if our firewall lacks immediate knowledge about a threat, WildFire will provide the necessary information to take action effectively.

The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall. While I primarily view WildFire as a repository for security incidents, its integration with antivirus and antispam profiles enhances our overall threat detection capabilities.

There is not much room for improvement for WildFire itself. It serves well as a repository for threat intelligence. Any enhancements should likely be focused on the firewall appliance to further strengthen overall security capabilities, such as refining app and user identity features.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks WildFire for almost a year.

Palo Alto Networks' technical support is excellent. They have consistently provided prompt assistance whenever needed, and we are satisfied with their service. I would rate their support as a nine out of ten.

Positive

Deploying Palo Alto Networks' products was easy, and integrating WildFire with our existing infrastructure was straightforward.

In Palo Alto Networks' suite, you only pay for what you use or need, rather than a bundled package.

Palo Alto Networks' BPA flagged certain URLs that needed blocking to tighten our firewall's security. WildFire serves as a repository for security incident data, enhancing our threat intelligence across the organization. While we don't manage it directly, WildFire provides crucial information about security occurrences globally.

The sandbox technology of WildFire has benefited us as it provides a layer of protection and immutability against threats.

Whether it is better to integrate WildFire with Palo Alto firewall into one product depends on your infrastructure setup. If you have a reliable internet connection, utilizing WildFire in the cloud is efficient for receiving timely updates. However, if internet connectivity is a concern, having WildFire as an appliance locally might be preferable.

My advice for those considering WildFire is to prioritize its inclusion with your firewall setup. Cybersecurity is interconnected globally, and WildFire provides crucial threat intelligence to keep your firewall updated and effective. It is essential for a smarter, more secure network defense.

Overall, I would rate WildFire as a nine out of ten.

Mainly file scanning and email threat detection, especially when it comes to attachments and communications.

We have encountered implementation issues and identified gaps within Palo Alto Networks WildFire. In general, we need to address certain issues for the benefit of our end users. To overcome these challenges, we have been searching for alternative approaches, such as a defender flow sheet or an advanced application with improved filtering features.

Some hardware and resource utilization issues exist.

In additional features, I would like to see playbooks or actions that are possible or available in my system, but what we really need is a way to contain or disconnect servers when malicious communication is initiated. Specifically, we require blocking playbooks or some mechanism to contain the IP or initiator. 

There will be many improvements to come ahead, especially in AI-based machine learning and actions on it. For example, having the ability to delete threats with a visibility of our global threats for up to seven days, etcetera. We need improvement in this area.

We have been working with this solution for five years. We are using version 9.8.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. It's done a good job. We have noticed that. We have multiple file scanning, and we filter devices in between. But at the perimeter level, it serves as a good filtering tool.

It's scalable and provides good visibility. We have a license for around 200 users. It can handle a significant number of devices and provides good visibility. However, we have limited usage. We have less than seven administrators for the solution. The expansion depends on the cost or licensing aspects and also considering other third-party options.

The support is actually a gift. We have a great relationship with them since it's great software and the support team is really good.

Positive

When it comes to Palo Alto Networks WildFire, The detection level is huge because we chain multiple devices in between. We have noticed a considerable number of detections in WildFire that were not detected by other devices.

The initial setup was a little bit complex, mainly due to the GUI console and management challenges. We faced some difficulties in those areas.

The deployment was handled by the vendor, and it took less time compared to other solutions. It was done by a single individual from our team, and now our new operations team manages it on a daily basis.

The solution is a bit expensive. 

We had multiple products like Juniper SRX and McAfee. However, we found more value in WildFire, so we removed all the other products and now solely focus on it.

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

• Much more visibility during an attack lifecycle; found a lot of infected hosts and vulnerabilities.

• App-ID
• Easy migration
• Credential-based attack prevention
• PBF easily configured
• Whole team can use the firewall and understand it

The GUI is better in 8.0, but I still feel it lacks the fast response most of us desire. Logs are much quicker.

We have not encountered any stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

Customer Service:

Customer service is excellent. Their support is top-tier for sure.

Technical Support:

Technical support is excellent. Their support is top-tier for sure.

We previously used legacy Cisco ASA. We switched because it was buggy and had no visibility; it was not easy for the rest of my team to use.

Initial setup was straightforward.

A vendor team implemented it. They were amazing.

It IS a bit expensive, but I think you get what you pay for. Value is there.

Before choosing this product, we also evaluated Check Point, Cisco, and Fortinet.

We primarily use the solution both in our company and with our clients. It is mostly used for security.

The solution offers near real-time updates for signatures, which is very useful for intelligent threat stamping. They update and improve frequently.

The sandboxing is very helpful. They have a cloud-based sandbox.

They've introduced machine learning and supervised machine learning, which is helpful.

They offer DNS security. 

The solution continues to grow quite extensively.

The UI, the marketing, and everything recently has changed and rebranded, and gotten better.

From a security perspective, they are always the best.

Stability is never a concern.

The solution can scale. 

The UI could continuously be improved. They've been working on this aspect and are getting better and better.

There are more specialized solutions that compete with Wildfire. Therefore, they need to work on their machine learning and AI to be more competitive. 

I've been dealing with the solution for eight years. 

It is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The scalability has been very good. 

Technical support is very good. However, it does depend on what service tier you are at - whether premium or standard. 

The pricing is competitive. It was not too expensive. The pricing depends on the environment and the number of devices. The pricing varies. 

I'm a consultant. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.