Palo Alto Networks WildFire Reviews

Being able to discover malicious files unknown to most AV vendors.

It has allowed me to stop new attacks before they could gain a foothold in my network.

• Inspection over different protocols (not just HTTP/FTP)
• Inspecting more file types
• Providing information back to the community that it uses to support its product.

I've used it for three years. However, my current company isn't using the product. I took a different engineering route into the company and I decided to use other protection solutions and not Wildfire.

The deployment of Wildfire was surprisingly easy.

Wildfire itself was a very stable product.

I never had any issues with scalability. When I enabled it, it seemed to work in the environment that the firewall was already servicing.

Great when I was at a large company but average or less than average at a small company.

Overall their support people are better than most tech companies.

There was no solution in this space before Wildfire. Both FireEye and Wildfire came onto the market right around the same time.

It was straightforward as I could, literally, turn on the firewall settings in five minutes or less.

You really don't need to pay to turn it on. The configuration is very simple.

There are two levels of Wildfire.

1. The free version which is great, so I would guess there is no ROI on this version
2. Then there is the subscription version of the service and this is a very affordable yearly subscription per firewall

Initially, the product doesn't cost anything for the first tier of usage you can prove the product before buying it.

• FireEye
• Blue Coat
• ProofPoint.
• Even as the more the list of products I look at each year is pretty long.

If you're running Palo Alto firewalls there is no reason not to use it at the free level. Once you have run it for a while at the basic level, you can make an educated decision if it's worth paying for the subscription (it is).

We are using Palo Alto Networks WildFire as a firewall to block malicious traffic. We use the IOCs, such as hash signatures matches, and IP addresses to block potential threats. Additionally, we use Palo Alto for VPN connectivity, but this is another product.

The solution has plenty of features.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks WildFire for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable.

We have 12 offices that are using Palo Alto Network solutions.

I have previously used Juniper solutions, such as the vSRX model.

The solution is easy to install.

We had one person from the vendor's support team help us do the implementation of the solution. They were very helpful.

The price of the Palo Alto Networks WildFire license is expensive. When it came time to renew the solution the price doubled.

We are evaluating other solutions, such as FortiGate because the price of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is high.

If your organization can afford this solution then I would recommend it. However, there are other solutions on the market that have similar features at a lower cost, such as FortiGate and Juniper.

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

User identification and the Applipedia are the most useful. The integration of the Applipedia with the application identification at layer seven makes it a very comprehensive, and secure, firewall.

We have the ability to see what traffic is coming and going in a much deeper and more detailed fashion. We have also found, and stopped, several malware applications before they infected the endpoints.

I've used it for five months.

During initial testing we were too strict on what was allowed outbound. We ended up needing to open up more broad categories. We also found that several websites do not function well with the SSL Decryption feature. We also found that a custom script is required to put the SSL Decryption certificate into Mozilla Firefox.

No the product has been very stable and reliable.

We implemented it in a smaller environment but, find that the 3000 series has plenty of power and has the ability to grow with us as we provide north-south as well as east-west security between internal environments.

Customer service is very friendly and responsive to any request.

I have found the tech support to be impressive. Support agents are available 24/7, and I have never waited for more than an hour to speak with an agent. I would consider the first team you call to be equivalent to most level two or three engineers.

Previously we used Cisco ASA 5510 and Fortinet. Fortinet was an old version and was phased out due to this. The Cisco ASA was replaced do to the limited capability of the out of box functionality and reporting.

Initial set-up was straightforward and easy. We were able to get both devices on the network and set-up to look at traffic within a few hours on split up time. The products complexity came from the terms and the overall thinking of how the product works.

We did it in-house.

Before choosing Palo Alto we also reviewed Cisco ASA, Fortinet, and Sophos.

The product is straightforward to implement, though if you are looking for a quick implementation, I would suggest bringing in an expert.

It has one of the best WebUIs that I have used, because at a glance looks simple, but offers us a lot of options to secure all the traffic that is passing through the device (or all traffic that the user decides to pass through). Besides, the way that scan the applications to detect what kind of application is do not affect anything about the device's performance. The way that the product process or handle the traffic, is one of the best in the industry.

Well, I work as a security consultant, so one of my functions is to help and provide to the end users with recommendations about technologies or process to secure their network. So, one of my customer decide to migrate from TMG/UMG to Palo Alto, it took a while, but during this process, I showed them many ways to improve their current security with Palo Alto, and after a while, they are very comfortable with the technology, for them now, it is easier to apply some kind of web filtering or application filtering than the past.

I'd like to see a wizard to create IPSec VPNs. They need to  improve the graphics to show the network behavior.

Deployment is easy.

The stability is acceptable.

It depends about the project, but offers a good HA option.

Always show to the customer what the product can do for them and what not, is a good practice, because they can open their eyes and to be sure what are the benefits of that technology. Always analyze the network topology, using the customer's network diagram and ask every doubt that you have, for my experience a good analysis and deployment plan give us a successful implementation.

We use it for remote access and security.

Remote access is excellent.

Management and web filtering can be improved. There should also be better reporting, particularly around web filtering.

We've had it for years.

It is very stable.

We were using another solution. We switched for more features.

Its initial setup is complex. It is specialized. It is not off-the-shelf stuff. 

We used a reseller. It took six months. You need two to three people for its deployment and maintenance.

It depends on the features. Additional features cost additional money as well.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

The backup is the best feature. It is better than with other firewalls. 

The cost of the solution is excessively high. 

I have been using Palo Alto Networks WildFire for more than four years. I would say five or six years. 

The solution is overpriced. 

We use the solution in our company.

The product is the best. It is superb.

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

It provides the enhancing network and endpoint security for the client through its IDA and IPS system filtering.

The most valuable features are:

• High availability with active-active and active-passive modes.
• Redundant power input for increased reliability.
• Fan-less design.

The data analytical system for deployment needs to improve.

Technical support is excellent, I would rate it a 10/10.

It is quite easy to set up.

The pricing and licensing option should be categorized for various countries such as for Bangladesh.

We looked at Forcepoint NGFW.

Technical support is excellent and it is a promising option.

We are a security company working in the security system for the banking sectors, and we're trying to penetrate through the identity and access management products for our clients.

We work with all of the Palo Alto technologies.

The most valuable features of this solution are sandbox capabilities. 

It removes all of the potential risks that come with attached documents or any macros from the vulnerability to be extended to Wildfire and to ensure that these kinds of attachments do not contain ransomware.

Our main concern is that everything has to be synced with the WildFire Cloud and has to be checked through the subscription.

In the next release, I would like to see some integration with other products, with endpoints and management. 

Also, there are too many features for the client to research.

We are starting to implement it into the Egyptian market. We closed one of the deals only last month. But, we have been working with the Next Generation and WildFire since 2015.

Technical support is working fine. They have helped us a lot.

We are using Forcepoint, Palo Alto the Next Generation, Cortex, and Panorama.

They are currently working on sandboxing for an on-premises version rather than a subscription for WildFire through the firewall.

The price is a bit higher than the other products such as TrendMicro, or FireEye.

We lost an opportunity where the client chose FireEye for the price.

It's a very good product.

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