Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB vs Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 10, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Palo Alto Networks URL Filt...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (7th)
Threat Stack Cloud Security...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Abdul  Basit - PeerSpot reviewer
Advanced features and robust support elevate overall network management experience
I think URL filtering could be better to some extent. Improvements could be made in Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB compared to Sophos. The URL filtering option in Palo Alto gives a very clear vision of the network and the applications using URL filtering. If you assign a user in a group not to access certain URLs, that user should only be allowed to access LinkedIn without running videos. However, deep URL filtering in Palo Alto is not configurable. One user can have access to LinkedIn with video running, while another cannot. They should improve this deep analysis of URL filtering options.
SC
SecOps program for us, as a smaller company, is amazing; they know what to look for
They could give a few more insights into security groups and recommendations on how to be more effective. That's getting more into the AWS environment, specifically. I'm not sure if that's Threat Stack's plan or not, but I would like them to help us be efficient about how we're setting up security groups. They could recommend separation of VPCs and the like - really dig into our architecture. I haven't seen a whole lot of that and I think that's something that, right off the bat, could have made us smarter. Even as part of the SecOps Program, that could be helpful; a quick analysis. They're analyzing our whole infrastructure and saying, "You have one VPC and that doesn't make a lot of sense, that should be multiple VPCs and here's why." The architecture of the servers in whatever cloud-hosting provider you're on could be helpful. Other than that, they should continue to expand on their notifications and on what's a vulnerability. They do a great job of that and we want them to continue to do that. It would be cool, since the agent is already deployed and they know about the server, they know the IP address, and they know what vulnerability is there, for them to test the vulnerability and see if they can actually exploit it. Or, once we patch it, they could double-check that it can't be. I don't know how hard that would be to build. Thinking on it off the top off my head, it could be a little challenging but it could also be highly interesting. It would also be great if we could test a couple of other features like hammering a server with 100 login attempts and see what happens. Real test scenarios could be really helpful. That is probably more something close to what they do with the SOC 2 audit or the report. But more visualization of that, being able to test things out on our infrastructure to make sure we can or can't hit this box could be interesting.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The Palo Alto solution has improved our organization by providing threat protection across a variety of internet connections. Our company also gets valuable insights regarding threat analysis."
"The stability of the solution is perfect and totally useful."
"I do not have to use additional security solutions to block the URLs, as PAN-DB and URL filtering are both powerful tools when it comes to security."
"Prohibited URLs can be listed by category."
"It's allowed us to have better visibility and protection from threats."
"I would rate Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB a perfect 10 out of 10."
"The tool blocks URLs."
"Being able to manage blacklists and whitelists easily is very useful, especially for internal access and limiting outbound access."
"It is scalable. It deploys easily with curl and yum."
"Technical support is very helpful."
"The most valuable feature is the SecOps because they have our back and they help us with the reports... It's like having an extension of your team. And then, it grows with you."
"It has been quite helpful to have the daily alerts coming to my email, as well as the Sev 1 Alerts... We just went through a SOX audit and those were pivotal."
"Threat Stack has connectivity."
"The number-one feature is the monitoring of interactive sessions on our Linux machines. We run an immutable environment, so that nothing is allowed to be changed in production... We're constantly monitoring to make sure that no one is violating that. Threat Stack is what allows us to do that."
"There has been a measurable decrease in the meantime to remediation... because we have so many different tech verticals already collated in one place, our ability to respond is drastically different than it used to be."
"With Threat Stack, we quickly identified some AWS accounts which had services that would potentially be exposed and were able to remediate them prior to release of products."
 

Cons

"The main limitation is that it needs a live Internet connection for ongoing updates."
"For hosting sites like Blogspot, they host sites that should be in different categories, but get lumped together in general. There needs to be more granularity or multiple categorizations."
"Customer service is sometimes inconsistent. Some engineers are very knowledgeable, while others cannot answer questions and delay solutions."
"I think Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is too costly compared to others."
"An area for improvement would be the technical support, which can be slow."
"The licensing costs and setup costs are very expensive for us. The price is significantly higher compared to other competitive products."
"One way Palo Alto can improve is by offering sandboxing. I don't know if they currently offer a sandboxing feature together with the firewall or not. They should provide secure sandboxing with the firewalls."
"Performance monitoring could use improvement."
"The solution’s ability to consume alerts and data in third-party tools (via APIs and export into S3 buckets) is moderate. They have some work to do in that area... The API does not mimic the features of the UI as far as reporting and pulling data out go. There's a big discrepancy there."
"The API - which has grown quite a bit, so we're still learning it and I can't say whether it still needs improvement - was an area that had been needing it."
"I would like further support of Windows endpoint agents or the introduction of support for Windows endpoint agents."
"Some features do not work as expected."
"It shoots back a lot of alerts."
"The user interface can be a little bit clunky at times... There's a lot of information that needs to be waded through, and the UI just isn't great."
"The one thing that we know they're working on, but we don't have through the tool, is the application layer. As we move to a serverless environment, with AWS Fargate or direct Lambda, that's where Threat Stack does not have the capacity to provide feed. Those are areas that it's blind to now..."
"The reports aren't very good. We've automated the report generation via the API and replaced almost all the reports that they generate for us using API calls instead."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is more expensive than ASA but is far cheaper than Checkpoint. So, pricing wise, it is right in the middle."
"Expensive, but that's because it provides everything."
"I'm happy with the amount that we spend for the product that we get and the overall service that we get. It's not cheap, but I'm still happy with the spend."
"It is very expensive compared to some other products. The pricing is definitely high."
"It is a cost-effective choice versus other solutions on the market."
"It came in cheaper than Trend Micro when we purchased it a few years ago."
"Pricing seems to be in line with the market structure. It's fine."
"We find the licensing and pricing very easy to understand and a good value for the services provided."
"What we're paying now is somewhere around $15 to $20 per agent per month, if I recall correctly. The other cost we have is SecOps."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Performing Arts
9%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Performing Arts
12%
University
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB?
The licensing costs and setup costs are very expensive for us. The price is significantly higher compared to other competitive products.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB?
I think URL filtering could be better to some extent. Improvements could be made in Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB compared to Sophos. The URL filtering option in Palo Alto gives a ve...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB?
We previously discussed Palo Alto Networks WildFire, and we are currently using it for our firewalls with the WildFire subscription included. We have micro-segmentation using the VMware environment...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering PAN-DB
Threat Stack, CSP,
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TRI-AD, Telkom Indonesia
StatusPage.io, Walkbase, Spanning, DNAnexus, Jobcase, Nextcapital, Smartling, Veracode, 6sense
Find out what your peers are saying about Darktrace, Check Point Software Technologies, Fortinet and others in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS). Updated: July 2025.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.