We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Juniper SRX finishes slightly ahead of Palo Alto Networks WildFire in this comparison. Juniper SRX provides robust enterprise network protection and connectivity and comprehensive performance, is stable, and scales easily. Palo Alto Network WildFire can be challenging for some users to learn. The overall configuration is a bit complex to use.
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"One of the nice things about FortiGate is that it can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises. You can actually do both. That's the biggest reason why I stick with this solution as opposed to something like Cisco Meraki. Another nice thing is that I can log directly into a FortiGate or get to it through their FortiCloud access products. They're pretty reliable and consistent. One of the reasons why I started using the product was their single pane of management. I can deploy their line of firewalls in conjunction with their switching and access points, and I can manage the entire network from one interface. I don't have to log into one interface for the firewall, another one for the access points, and another one for the switches. These firewalls have access point controller functionality built right into the system, so I don't even have to purchase additional devices to manage them."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"What's most important is the ease of use."
"This version is stable. I don't have any issues with this solution, in our environment, it works well."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"The ports are really versatile for their application and don't always have to be used for the purpose for which they were made."
"The CLI works perfectly."
"I like that Juniper SRX is easy to use, scalable, and stable with good performance."
"The reason that we picked Juniper SRX is for the scalability, the fit for purpose, the tools that are available, the ongoing support and the ability to monitor, but particularly for the virtual routers in our data centers so that we can quickly upscale them when needed, when we need more throughput."
"Technical support is perfect."
"The high availability of the application is good."
"From a protection perspective, it provides a network perimeter security function for our company."
"The main features are safeguarding their data and ensuring robust security services for organizational data."
"WildFire has been instrumental in blocking a number of new threats, before common desktop anti-virus tools were able to detect them."
"The solution is easy to use and the Panorama feature is good. The software management or the malware blocking and some authentication management system are good."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is how it keeps up-to-date with viruses."
"The solution has plenty of features."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is its ability to adapt to environments and its robustness."
"What I like about Palo Alto is that it is a complete product, with everything in it."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"Fortinet already improved FortiGate, but in the current market, many brands of security devices have improved together. Fortinet still needs to catch up with market standards. Fortinet is lacking in features in comparison to competitors."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"In the future, I would like to see improvements made to cloud-based management."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"The reporting in Fortinet FortiGate could improve. Customers are having to purchase additional reporting components. When I have used the Sophos solution it is a complete solution, in Fortinet FortiGate you have to use additional tools to have the features needed."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"The GUI needs to be easier to handle."
"The solution could cost less. It's a bit expensive right now."
"Juniper SRX could improve by adding an IPX feature."
"We tried configuring the IDS for more than four months, but it did not work properly."
"The capacity can be limiting. We have outgrown its capacity. You can only scale up to a certain extent, depending on the device purchased."
"The reporting is lacking."
"The pricing strategy of the vendor could improve."
"I think improvement can be done to the security part, particularly the UDM, and the product should have a user-friendly interface similar to FortiGate. It should have the Azure RBAC in the next release."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"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."
"The deployment model could be better."
"Our main concern is that everything has to be synced with the WildFire Cloud and has to be checked through the subscription."
"The data analytical system for deployment needs to improve."
"It's not really their problem, it's a problem across the board. There will always be problems with interrupted traffic. We have to set it up where we're playing a middle man game where we're stripping it out, looking at it, and then putting it back together and sending it on its way. That requires CPU cycles. And there's some overhead with that."
"The VPN and decryption need improvement."
"The product's false positive logs could be more user-friendly to understand. They could provide examples of precious cases to learn."
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, Fortinet FortiSandbox, Check Point SandBlast Network and Zscaler Internet Access.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
