Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Reviews

We use the Bridgecrew, IaC, and CSPM domains.

Prisma Cloud has given us a good approach to view our security loopholes. Container security has also helped us.

CSPM is very useful because it gives us good policies and violation alerts. The solution is very good for IaC too.

The reporting should be much more refined.

They need to improve the API gateway.

I have been using Prisma Cloud for three years.

The stability is improving.

The scalability is good. We can extend it to many cloud vendors.

Palo Alto's support is good.

Positive

The solution is good. It is easy to use, but Prisma keeps on releasing new features. So the console becomes a little bit typical. Auto-remediation is time-efficient.

The RSA conference is valuable to my organization. The conference has an impact on our organization's cybersecurity purchases sometimes. Overall, I would rate Prisma Cloud an eight out of ten.

When we did a POC, we realized that this product was able to give us insights into how consumers or services are activated. We could tell if, in certain cases, there was any kind of manual issues such as a misconfiguration. The solution is used to help us to reconfigure items and figure out what reconfiguration needs to be done, et cetera. Our target was to enhance the security portion of our AWS cloud.

The security features are quite good. 

The monitoring part is excellent. It is able to completely monitor our users in order to see what the users are doing at what time and if the users are currently logged in from India, and after five minutes of seeing a user if they are then trying to log in from Singapore, for example. Of course, this would not be possible, and so we would know something was wrong. It can pick up questionable behavior that may have been missed.

The reporting is great.

It's very user-friendly. You can easily make customized dashboards as well. 

We can easily restrict the users if we need to. We can even restrict them from accessing certain applications or services.

If anything tries to come in from a malicious IP, it will block it.

The initial setup is easy. 

We've found the solution to be stable and reliable. 

The solution does offer pretty good integration options.

Technical support is quite helpful.

The remediation part could be better. It should be able to automatically remediate on the basis of its artificial intelligence. If there are alerts, it should directly act and surround the malicious threat with a container or something. Instead of waiting on approval, it should immediately act. There should be no need for manual input when there is a threat on hand.

The ability to scale is limited as it is a SAS product. 

The licensing is a bit confusing.

We've used the solution for a while. Previously, it was RedLock Solutions and we were using it since it was known as RedLock. That's around let's say two years now. Then, Palo Alto bought it, and we now use it under the new name.

The stability and reliability are excellent. There are no bugs or glitches. It does not crash or freeze. it's great.

The scalability isn't infinite. It's limited.

That said, we haven't really tested it as we haven't added any users or anything into the solution yet.

We have found the technical support to be helpful and responsive. Originally, when we needed assistance with integrating it into our AWS cloud, we contact them and they helped us immediately. It was a very positive experience. We were very satisfied. 

The initial setup is very easy. It's not overly complex. A company should be able to handle it without any issues. 

We pay a licensing fee on a yearly basis.

It is not costly. However, the way it is priced is based on the number of incentives. The problem is, what is the number of incentives? We don't know. They seem to do it by the number of workloads, however, we're unclear as to what defines a workload. They need to improve on the licensing front. They need to be more clear about the whole thing.

I've never evaluated any other services.

We are Palo Alto partners.

I'd advise that companies that get big and have a lot of servers or critical applications in their cloud invest in this solution.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is for container security and monitoring.

It has helped us understand the dynamic topology of our containers and manage security through the application of policies that our pipelines apply straight from Git.

The most valuable feature is the automated forensics.

I would like to see the inclusion of automated counter-attack, although this is probably illegal.

We primarily use the solution to create a cluster or scenario, for runtime management on containers.

We have three containers in our organization. Two were legacy containers and we added a third. The solution helped with our DevOps pipeline and allowed us to inspect and analyze the product.

The runtime mechanism on the solution is very useful. It's got very good network mapping between containers. If you have more than one container, you can create a content data link between them.

I'm not sure about areas for improvement on the solution, however, I do think the compliance and dashboarding could be better.

The innovation side of the solution could be more efficient and more detailed.

I've been using the solution for two months.

The initial setup was reasonably complex. The container security makes it a complex implementation. If I were to rate the complexity out of ten I'd give it a seven.

We use the cloud deployment model.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.