Palo Alto Networks WildFire Reviews

It can do sandboxing on the premises, and it can be directly integrated with Palo Alto NGFW. The malware information on the file that has been sandboxing will be directly updated to the Palo Alto NGFW, and added to the Palo Alto Networks NGFW malware signature library. Also, the credential data within the file that has been sandboxing still be kept on the premises.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire can detect many types of attacks that are using malware embedded on files/URLs with minimum time, and it can increase the effectiveness of resources (time and people) to prevent the malware.

In my opinion, it could be developed to be dependent not only on signatures, but also on patterns and behavior of malware. What I would like to see in the next version/release is to be able to handle much more file types on premises during deployment, because now on premises deployment a .APK file must be sent to the cloud for sandboxing.

I can't remember exactly, but probably more than six months.

For now, I have no issues with the deployment.

For now, I have no issues with the stability.

For now, I have no issues with the scalability.

Both customer server and technical support are very good.

In our case, before we contact Palo Alto Networks technical support, we can contact the Palo Alto Networks local distributor, who provide Palo Alto Networks technical support locally.

I forgot what the name or product that used previously, but the reason I choose Palo Alto Networks wildfire is it integrated with Palo Alto Networks NGFW that already used on the network environment

The initial setup of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is simple.

We’re the ones who implement the Palo Alto Networks WildFire in our customers environments.

It’s not about what we will get directly from having Palo Alto Networks WildFire as an ATD device, but it’s all about the loss of resources you suffer if you don't have it implemented.

We primarily use the solution for threat protection. 

I found the solution easy to deploy.

It has a nice IP set.

The VPN technologies are very good. 

It's largely very feature-rich.

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support is generally helpful.

It is stable and reliable. 

I don't have any real problems with the solution. 

High availability features are lacking. It's a bit too standard as a solution. It needs high availability. 

We'd like the solution to be a bit cheaper. It's quite pricey. 

I've been working with the solution for three or four years. 

The solution is pretty stable. I'd rate it eight or nine out of ten in terms of reliability. It has limitations for high-availability features. It's more traditional. 

It's a good solution if you need to scale. 

We have three or four customers using the solution right now. 

Technical support is fine. We haven't had issues with them when we need help. 

The solution is straightforward to set up. Since it is so easy, it takes one or two months for a migration. An initial setup might take one or two weeks. 

We need Panorama. We give the IP to the team and Panorama as well. Then we have to ensure the firewall has internet access. 

There are a lot of licensing options. It can be a bit complicated for users. They could work to simplify the options. The product is also a very expensive firewall. 

I'm an integrator. We do use a variety of versions of the solution. We have a few clients using the product. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. It improves protection and is a good firewall. 

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. I'm happy with its capabilities.

We use the solution for site-to-site VPNs and it replaces the proxy.

The most valuable features of the solution are user-friendliness, price, good security, and cloud-related options.

The solution can improve its traffic management.

I have been using the solution for three months.

I give the stability a ten out of ten.

I give the scalability a seven out of ten. We have seven thousand people using the solution.

We previously used Cisco Networks but we switched to Palo Alto Networks WildFire because it has more options that meet our needs.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The implementation was completed in-house.

The price is fair and comparable to other solutions.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

A limited number of people are required for maintenance. One person is enough for the day-to-day but we have overlapped for coverage. 

We are using the solution for our zero-day advanced persistent threats(APT). Additionally, we are using it as our only sole network distribution.

I have found that there are many good features found with this solution. There is the option of cloud and an on-premises version. 

The service-level agreement(SLA) provides the ability to converts the unknown to the known in less than five minutes. 

The environment analysis runs in multiple areas and does not just execute in one area, such as the virtual hypervisor.

The solution is completely integrated with all the other Palo Alto products. I think that it is the best part for endpoint protection. The firewall features include URL and DNS filtering, threat protection, and antivirus. 

The threat intelligence that we receiving in the reporting was not as expected. We were expecting more. Additionally, we should be able to whitelist a specific file based on a variety of attributes.

In a future release, they could make the solution be a stand-alone deployment, one that does not need another Palo Alto solution and can integrate with any other solution from another company. For example, we could use this solution together with other solutions, such as Fortinet firewalls or endpoint solutions. 

The solution is stable and reliable. Since it is on the cloud we do not have to worry about this much.

The solution is scalable. We have approximately 400 users using the solution. We currently do not plan to increase the capacity because our maximum amount of users would be 500 users and we only have approximately 300 on-premise users at this time while the rest of them are working remotely.

I have found the technical support responsive.

Since it is a cloud-based version the setup was straightforward and easy, we just have to activate the license to use it.

We are on an annual subscription. When we purchased the firewall, we had activated this solutions license for a minimum of one year. The price of the solution is fair.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Palo Alto Networks WildFire a ten out of ten.

Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones.

Threat Prevention and WildFire features should be enabled in Palo Alto. With this product, we receive the best monitoring and reports.

The VPN and decryption need improvement.

No, I did not encounter any issues with Palo Alto's firewall. The product is very stable.

No, but you should do the rightsizing before buying the product. 

They provide a medium level of technical support.

I used Cisco. Palo Alto is better for datacenter and Cisco for perimeter.

Straightforward to use.

More expensive than other firewalls.

We evaluated Cisco Firepower.

My advice is to install Palo Alto's firewall as a datacenter. You should enable the features (Threat Prevention (AS, AV, and Vulnerability Protection), File Blocking, URL Filtering, WildFire, etc.).

Palo Alto's firewall is the best firewall right now. I have used Palo Alto since 2014.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is an ATP solution. It provides advanced threat protection, so it can protect customers against zero-day attacks.

The only problem with this solution is the cost. It's expensive.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire demonstrates good performance. It's stable.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire has good scalability.

We came across some issues with the Palo Alto support team, but overall their support is okay.

Like any other firewall, this product is okay, in terms of setup. The initial setup was very quick, and can be done within a few minutes.

This product and its license is expensive.

Most of the customers get a yearly subscription.

I didn't see any costs in addition to the standard license and fees for Palo Alto Networks WildFire.

We also provide Palo Alto Networks WildFire to our customers, and we've been dealing with it since it came into the product line.

We deployed this solution both on cloud and on-premises. It's a mixture of both types of deployment.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is a good solution. It has been able to mitigate a lot of threats and attacks.

We have a lot of customers using Palo Alto Networks WildFire.

We have network engineers who handle the deployment and maintenance of this solution, and they are the same people who handle the deployment and maintenance of Fortinet FortiGate.

We recommend this product to people who want to start using it, but if the customer only has limited budget, then we cannot recommend it.

I'm giving Palo Alto Networks WildFire a score of eight out of ten.

We use WildFire for malware protection in our customers' companies.

WildFire's application encryption is useful.

The system performance degrades after the solution has been deployed for some time. The data that it gives us becomes a little bit slow. When you try to get some data for troubleshooting, it seems like it's working hard to extract that data. 

I've been selling WildFire for more than two years.

WildFire is stable.

Wildfire is scalable.

Palo Alto support is very slow in this region.

WildFire is easy to deploy. I have been working on these solutions for quite some time, so I don't foresee any issues.

WildFire is a little bit pricey. Sometimes it's difficult to sell it to customers at the current price.

We sometimes use Fortinet FortiGate for clients. It depends upon the requirements, which vary from customer to customer. 

I rate WildFire six out of 10. To people considering WildFire, I recommend that they understand their own needs. They should do the proper due diligence. Right now, everybody's cutting costs because of COVID-19. They're trying to automate most things through the PA, so the cost-cutting is going to be a major factor in the future.

My primary use case for this solution is for a secure gateway. It creates a proxy or an appropriation for the suspicious files that can be damaging. 

The cloud-based services are a nice feature.

I do not find it as secure as other solutions. Furthermore, the cloud-based solutions are still not legally available in countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia. Some countries do not allow the service according to country obligations. They can not use the cloud services for government offices. So, Wildfire is not allowed in several locations.

I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power.

I have previous experience with FireEye and Symantec. I find that Symantec is a standalone on an enterprise level secure market, which I cannot say for WildFire.

The initial setup was straightforward and easy.