Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Reviews

This solution helps us with visibility of the data stored in the cloud and it even scans our files. If a user is trying to upload any kind of malware file or a script, Prisma SaaS scans those files and helps us identify anything malicious. If it finds something, it directly cleans the file. We are partners with Prisma SaaS.

I've evaluated multiple solutions on the market but to quarantine and clean a malware file is something I haven't seen anywhere else. It's a great feature and provides a lot of security.  

I would like to see a hybrid model which has API plus in-line security, where the user's data is controlled via an API call and also controlled in-line. 

We been using this solution for over a year. 

We've never had any issues in terms of stability. 

In terms of scalability, we initially went with the out-of-the-box solution which was able to support around 40 to 50 users and it was fine. There was no need for any add-ons. We now have a license for 200 users and it scales well. 

Technical support is responsive. We contacted them a few times and they were helpful. 

The initial setup was straightforward. It was completely on cloud and easily activated, and we were up and running quite quickly.

The licensing of this solution is a little expensive and is paid on an annual basis. 

If a company is looking for an API-based technology to control their SaaS data uses and user access, then Prisma SaaS is a good product but if they're looking for a complete CASB solution, then this is not suitable. The solution provides a lot of security but when you look at it in terms of the high cost for licensing, then it is not cost effective to spend that amount just to protect the data stored by the user.

I rate this solution a six out of 10. 

We use it to securely access cloud data centers or cloud platforms. If a customer has a lot of workload in the cloud, then from the Prisma Access cloud, they can create secure access to all cloud platforms.

The users can securely access any cloud data centers or cloud platforms. In terms of the features, it has all the features that Palo Alto Next-Generation Firewall has. It is also very stable and scalable.

When it comes to the VPN, it uses the global protect VPN functionality to connect remotely, but it has a feature limitation for assigning multiple IP subnets to different user groups. It would be much better if we are able to assign the current IP blocks for the subnets based on the user groups.

We got its distribution about eight months ago.

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. The scalability can be based on the number of users or the number of networks. You can expand it the way you want. In Sri Lanka, we have about 3,000 users.

Palo Alto's technical support is good because they have multiple methods and licenses. Their premier support seems better.

The initial setup is straightforward in a way, but there are certain things that may require Panorama, which is a centralized management platform. The management of certain things can only be done through Panorama. For the initial integration, a few steps have to be followed, but after that, it is easy to configure and use.

For the console-side deployment, one or two engineers would be enough. A complete user deployment may take a few weeks to complete.

Prisma Access is a little bit expensive.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Prisma Access a nine out of ten.

The features I find most valuable is WildFire, user integration, and the basic technology features.

I would like to see better pricing and an easier logging process. Also, if there was a way to log a global log, everything could go onto the system. It would be better if there was a third log, otherwise one would have to do everything manually. 

From an audit or security perspective, the solution has been very stable so far. But I am not sure if it will stay stable once deployment takes place. 

The initial setup was really straightforward.

I will give this solution an eight out of ten rating because theoretically, I looked at a lot of other products but Palo Alto seems to be covering all aspects and I'm sure the competitors like to tell everybody they have more features, but I've not experienced it yet.

Prisma SaaS can be used to secure sanction applications that people use on enterprises. You can integrate the solution using ATI to sanction applications such as Office 365, Google, and Salesforce. You can apply controls to protect from data leakage and then apply cloud-based DLP policies.

The valuable features are that it is easy to use, easy to integrate, and is stable. It's scalable as well.

When it comes to integration mechanisms, Prisma SaaS does not support reverse proxy type of integrations. For example, a product like Netskope has a lot more integration mechanisms than does Prisma.

I've been using it for about one year.

It's a stable product.

It's scalable. We have about 500 users.

The technical support has been good.

Prisma SaaS requires a small implementation. Two engineers would be sufficient for the deployment process.

We implemented it ourselves.

I would rate Prisma SaaS at seven on a scale from one to ten. It is easy to integrate and is stable and scalable, but it needs to support reverse proxy integrations.

We are an on-premises company at the moment, so we use GlobalProtect. Our firewalls are hosted in our on-premises data centers and offices. We have been using this solution for years and are exploring options like Prisma Access and Azure VPN to enhance security and support for remote workers.

GlobalProtect has been beneficial for its cloud security capabilities, which are vital as businesses seek hybrid options and need to support remote workers while addressing latency issues. By establishing regional hubs in the cloud, we benefit from good backbone services provided by cloud providers like Prisma Access or Azure, which enhances performance.

GlobalProtect can face challenges with latency, especially when remote workers connect to centralized locations. Hosting it in the cloud can mitigate these issues by allowing connection through the nearest Palo Alto or Prisma Cloud regional hub. Overall, no specific issues with the product itself have been observed, but the need for cloud adoption is noted.

We have been using GlobalProtect for several years. For Prisma Access and Azure VPN, we have been testing them for the last couple of months.

GlobalProtect is a satisfying solution, and the product is robust without major stability issues.

Scalability can be limited by the physical hardware, which has performance thresholds. To scale, one would need to upgrade or acquire more hardware. However, if manpower increases significantly, then investing in scaling the hardware is justifiable.

Customer support from Palo Alto has been satisfactory. We rarely need to contact support due to having a strong internal team and a robust product.

Positive

Previously, we used GlobalProtect and Palo Alto Firewalls. We also worked with Cisco ASA and Connect. We are now exploring options like Prisma Access and Azure VPN.

The initial setup of GlobalProtect was straightforward and easy.

We have not performed ROI calculations yet, as we are still learning about the technology.

Pricing for Prisma Access and Prisma SD WAN is high due to the need for different hardware flavors like IONs. However, if a good return on investment is proven, then it is a good option.

The solutions we are considering are Prisma Access and Microsoft Azure VPN.

The advice is highly dependent on whether the business is more on-premises or cloud-based. On-premises businesses are recommended to use GlobalProtect, while cloud-based companies should consider cloud solutions to avoid additional spending on on-premises hosting. 

The overall rating for GlobalProtect is nine out of ten.