We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks K2-Series and SonicWall NSSP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Overall, the pricing of the solution is very good. The product offers good value."
"The most valuable feature is the policy routing and application control."
"Virtual Domains (VDOMs) are a feature that we found valuable."
"What's most important is the ease of use."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"It has improved our organization with control data."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is the performance which is above their competitors. The throughput they have delivered is good. When we used other solutions they failed the deployment when we were using different rules. They have a theory perform performance light and performance degradation. However, Palo Alto Networks K2-Series never fails in that scenario."
"The most valuable features are the intuitive user interface, ease of use, and reporting."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is its management abilities. Additionally, the updates are very good."
"This firewall is very good for our customers because they don't have to write their own rules for adding an application."
"It caters to typical use cases across various technologies. MDR and XDR, for example, focus on user and endpoint protection. It's pretty straightforward."
"Everything I could possibly want has already been implanted in the new version."
"Palo Alto firewalls are scalable enough. We have about 110 employees in our company, and we are about to expand to 130."
"Overall, this is a very simple and very effective firewall, and I am satisfied with it."
"The VPN functionality is really good. Overall, the whole device is very easy to manage. The software that comes with it is also good."
"It has been delivering results efficiently. Its configurations and updates have been easy. It is also user-friendly."
"The solution's pricing is good."
"SonicWall NSSP is stable and scalable too."
"A lack of integration between our data centers."
"We would like to see a better training platform implemented."
"Some of the software stability could improve."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"Fortinet FortiGate is not very easy to use. The navigation could be improved to make it easier to use."
"The way everything is set up could be easier. Currently, people need a lot of experience and knowledge to administer it and to link it to devices."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"Palo Alto releases a lot of bug fixes for their firewalls, which means it's necessary to do frequent upgrades. They should work on decreasing their bugs so that upgrades aren't needed so often."
"The scalability of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is good. It is good for larger environments over smaller ones."
"We had some issues with upgrading in the past. They could make the process easier."
"Its networking features could be better."
"If we have issues, they take anywhere from two days to a week to respond. I even wrote to their CEO because there was no response. When it comes to support, this is the worst company."
"The solution needs a series of OS changes."
"The technical support, and how they provide it to the client, needs to be improved."
"The product should get frequent updates allowing us to add new signatures."
"No security product is foolproof against hackers, intruders, and other such things. As a security product, they have to keep pace in terms of protection from new hackers and intruders."
"The user interface, the GUI, could be improved."
"Its reporting functions can be improved. It has decent reporting, but you got to pay a lot more money for it. That's where it begins to fall apart. It comes with minimal zero reporting unless you buy some extra modules. With those extra modules, you can get all the data, but it takes a while to put together what you need for your customer. It is for technical people, but there is no executive summary of the reporting."
"The solution's stability and scalability also need improvement."
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is ranked 28th in Firewalls with 29 reviews while SonicWall NSSP is ranked 38th in Firewalls with 4 reviews. Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is rated 8.4, while SonicWall NSSP is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series writes "Easy to implement and manage, and the documentation is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall NSSP writes "Good VPN functionality, very good support, easy to manage, and meets all of our needs". Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas SonicWall NSSP is most compared with SonicWall NSa. See our Palo Alto Networks K2-Series vs. SonicWall NSSP report.
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.
