Palo Alto Networks WildFire Reviews

We use Palo Alto Networks WildFire for firewall and IT services. We also use it for bank security requirements. They are remarkable for support of threat analysis on files. 

There are always problems with the operational files. You can only do malware identification. That is the way that this device functions.

All of the traffic is scanned in a single flow, which improves the response times for the user. This is how Palo Alto Networks WildFire helps our organization.

We appreciate the support of Palo Alto Networks WildFire for our next-generation firewall equipment in deployment.

There are certain changes that I was expecting in the previous version, and I hope that they are soon fixed. Their database has good Information over threats because of Unit42 however there is a serious competition to the product from Cisco ThreatGrid and Umbrella

I don't think there are any major features that are different from Palo Alto versus their competitors but with time the PA needs to improvise on products and threat feed if it needs to be the leader

I regularly work with companies with over 2000 users and they safely use Palo Alto Networks WildFire. I haven't seen any problems with stability. 

At my company, we use it regularly. For my previous customers, it's a first for them to use Palo Alto products.

Using virtual settings, scalability with WildFire is awesome. On the physical configuration, it is harder and more independent. The scalability is limited there. 

There are very good options available with the Palo Alto Networks WildFire. They have given me options for all the support that I need. 

With internet speed, the settings range from 2GB or 10GB to 40GB. There are a lot of internet settings options, so I guess they're very scalable in that.

We are not an overly large company, so I can say safely around 400 to 2000 is the user base of people that we support.

Palo Alto's customer support is good. They are awesome. I would rate them nine out of ten for technical support services.

We have not compared this product with other but we would like to evaluate the options if they are available. 

They have many different options with Palo Alto WildFire and the setup is quick. The deployment normally takes around 15 minutes.

If you have all the details in hand, it does not take more than 15 minutes to deploy a wildfire and integrate them. Most of it has been deployed before the said timeframe. The only challenge is for tuning on policies and implementing it with DLP to make sure it is in compliance. The key point that I look for while protecting the customer is to make sure that they don't have any opportunities for a malware attack.

An integrator was not required for deployment. I did the installation myself. We had very good documentation. I just needed to read the documentation thoroughly and it was deployed.

Palo Alto does not require any additional costs to the standard licensing fees, but we have the regular license model. If I just want a firewall, then I need to buy two licenses. 

If we use a VM base, then I need to buy the VM base license, along with the support package from the provider. However, without the license fee, I need to buy IPS support separately.

Other products like Cortex Data Lake support also need to be licensed separately, but that is a wonderful feature. 

With Palo Alto, I can just go buy whatever extra features I want, and they give me a 30-day free license, so that is useful for me.

I can go ahead and buy the product, or if it is not for me anymore, it is free to try. That is a good way to sell their products too. Our subscription runs on a yearly base.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would give Palo Alto Networks WildFire a 8 for safety.

We use the product to identify and analyze unknown threats. This includes handling new files or URLs that are not yet known to be malicious. It operates in a secure environment, ensuring that no infrastructure is at risk while determining if a file is harmful.

The most valuable feature is WildFire's integration with other threat prevention modules on the firewall. This capability allows for the automatic marking of malicious URLs and rapid propagation of this information, which is crucial for defending against widespread phishing campaigns.

One area for improvement is the expansion of the sandbox environment to include a broader range of platforms, such as Linux, macOS, and mobile operating systems.

The solution is stable and effectively handles the analysis and identification of unknown threats without significant issues.

The platform is scalable as it integrates with other threat prevention modules.

The integration with threat prevention modules and the quick propagation of malicious URL data make WildFire a valuable tool for threat detection and response.

I rate it an eight. 

We use it for DNS security, URL filtering, and threat prevention.

The global product feature, the VPN, needs improvement, and we need some enhanced features.

I have been working with Palo Alto Networks WildFire for three years now.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is definitely stable.

We have found that Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable.  We currently have six thousand users for the product.

Technical support is responsive when we have used their services.

Positive

We were using Cisco for the last ten years and we wanted to change the product.

We migrated from a Cisco firewall to Palo Alto, so it took some time to migrate all the services.

Our migration process was completed by a third-party consultant.

When purchasing the product there are subscription fees involved.

We made the conversion between Cisco and Palo Alto Networks WildFire without any other options being considered.

I would rate Palo Alto Networks WildFire an eight out of ten.

My primary use case of this solution is on-frame and in-cloud security of the infrastructure.

We use this with different clients in the financial sphere, the health sector, and the insurance sector. Across all of these different verticals, we use this product.

Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides.

As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity. And, the industry is currently moving towards automation and orchestration. I would like to see more of this in the product. They are part of the future roadmap to AI (Artificial Intelligence).

It is stable, and we are also trying to integrate this with the Palo Alto MIME shell. We did that, and also I have inquired recently about Evident, which is a recent acquisition. So I have requested for demos, and still I did not see any response from Palo Alto yet. This is something that we would like to explore.

It's pretty much scalable. We were able to manage both the cloud, and also the on-frame devices or appliances from centralized management station. So, we just implemented in the  migration onto the cloud.

We used tech support to help us implement the product initially. 

I have prior experience with Cisco Firepower. But, they are very expensive in comparison to Palo Alto.

The initial setup was complex because we were switching from traditional firewalls to application-based firewalls. We needed Palo Alto's help insetting up initially. From there, we tried to understand, and followed suit with implementation.

It is a reasonable price compared to other solutions on the market.

Some of our clients used to have the traditional firewalls so where we do have enabled the application control but being it's a pretty small firewall. At the end of the day, even in spite of them demanding the application controls, it's on top of the firewall functionality (especially in terms of controlling the applications). So, after implementing the Palo Alto firewalls, they have achieved more than what is expected, and we are able to control the number of applications; who gets to have access, and what is flowing inside the network. Anything that is traversing the firewall, is available right now.

We use this solution to identify whether an unknown file is managed or not. We also use it to identify any unknown file that is executable without reputation. We do this before releasing it to the end-user.

We release the email and the network traffic but also analyze the file. We can do it concurrently before we release the actual traffic to the end user when we have already completed the analysis.

The analysis is very fast. The intermittent is a millisecond and has a speedy response time.

There are some formats that the solution cannot support today, but they are mostly very rare formats. So that can be improved.

We have been using this solution for the past three years. We are using the latest version, and it is deployed on Google cloud. In addition, we do an integration with the Cortex XDR together with Palo Alto Networks WildFire.

It is a stable solution. 

Regarding scalability, 1000 to 5000 is not a problem, but anything more than that, I am unsure. However, it is scalable, and most of the people in our company that use the solution are from our group's information.

We have used the technical support for analysis purposes. They are sound, and the testing system and updates are good. They proactively give us updates, and they are doing a good job. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

We have used different solutions in the past but switched to Palo Alto Networks WildFire due to the fast analysis.

The installation was straightforward. It is a cloud and FaaS-based platform and took about one to two hours to deploy. We completed the deployment in-house, and very minimal maintenance is required.

We have about ten people on our team. We needed only one person to install and deploy and about three to maintain.

I am unsure about the specific ROI, but we have managed to quarantine and block multiple manages on the enterprise price, which is good. We have benefited from Wildfire.

Our licensing costs are annual, and I believe it is not that expensive. I rate the pricing a six out of ten, so it is on the cheaper side.

We evaluated getting proof of concept for another solution and end-user analyzer, but there were limitations to the integration, so we didn't proceed with it.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, I would recommend doing a proof of concept first before deciding on the solution.

The free version does not have real-time updates. It is slow. 

I have been working with the product for four to five years. 

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is stable. 

My company has over 20 users for the product. 

We get support in the free version. 

We switched to the solution since it matches our requirements and helps to analyze threats with a free version. 

I use Palo Alto Networks WildFire's free version. 

I rate Palo Alto Networks WildFire an eight out of ten. 

Sandboxing is the primary use case. WildFire is used for that. There are two options: one is on the cloud, and one is on-premise. The cloud version is perfect. It is working very well. But on the on-premise version, we have faced a lot of problems previously.  

The threat intelligence from WildFire supports our proactive defense strategies. Palo Alto has a unit 42 team, which is one of the best in the market for threat intelligence. Their threat intelligence is comprehensive.

Also, Palo Alto is a pioneer in AI and ML integration, so I think there are some AI processes running in clusters.

It can detect new threats, particularly. It's a sandboxing prototype. 

We send mostly emails or connections with context or files. The most important thing is how many kinds of files the sandbox can handle. Also, Palo Alto is good at this. There are more than 20 different file types, this product can understand.

 The important thing for sandboxing is how many different types of files the sandbox product is analyzing. And so, also, Palo Alto is good at it, compared to other sandboxes.

Palo Alto doesn't do much to support the on-premise version. It wants too much self-support for the on-premise version of WildFire. 

But for regulation purposes, some of our customers don't want to use the cloud environment, so they have to use the on-premise version. 

Integration is okay, not too hard, with Palo Alto. But we are facing a lot of issues, and most of the issues go unresolved. So, the on-premise version is not very stable.

With my experience, the cloud version is stable. So I need the on-premises version to be more stable.

I have been working with Palo Alto for four years, but I have been familiar with WildFire for one and a half years.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

The cloud version is very stable. It is working very fine. Integration is very easy. There are not too many issues. I like it. Compared to the on-premise version, it is very easy and very effective for customers.

Some of my colleagues work on SD-WAN.

The initial setup is a little bit complex on-premise, but not too complex because it can only connect to a Palo Alto firewall. On the cloud, it is very easy; you only need to enable it with a click, and it is done. After that, you can set up the configuration on the firewall. 

But on-premise, it is not a configuration issue; it's a little bit of a stability issue.

Integration with existing infrastructure: 

WildFire can only integrate with the Palo Alto firewall. Right now, maybe XDR can integrate on the cloud version, but you cannot integrate it with other vendors or put it standalone without any Palo Alto product.

We are an integrator. We also work with some other vendors.

WildFire has improved our customer's security posture and reduced costs overall.

It's not hard to configure as it connects to the firewall. After integration, you don't need much configuration and don't waste too much time, so the return on investment is very rapid.

In general, all Palo Alto products are a little bit higher in price compared to competitors.

I recommend it, but mostly the cloud version.

I recommend it to any company who needs sandboxing or this kind of file analysis. But they must be careful if they have to use on-premise, because of the stability issues.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I'm a reseller.

WildFire analyzes the malware in the network such as SSDB and can help analyze the files transmitted over the network, and can detect if the file contains malware.

There are features such as sandboxing in cloud. It submits malware to Palo Alto on the cloud, verifies the reputation file, and analyzes the malware in the files.

The graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure.

Palo Alto limits the files submitted per day. There are limitations with the boxes for the Palo Alto module. In the future, I think Palo Alto will reduce the sandboxing in the on-prem version because the box cannot operate.

In the future, Palo Alto could reduce the time it takes to process the file. Sometimes it takes 10 minutes.

I've been using this solution for three years.

It's stable.

It's scalable.

Technical support is very good. In Vietnam, we work directly with Palo Alto engineers.

I also have experience with Check Point, Fortinet, and Cisco.

Configuration is easy.

For the last three years, the price of Palo Alto in Vietnam has been very high.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.