We performed a comparison between NetWitness Platform and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I can have enterprise security, email security, next generation firewall security log, HIDS and NIDS logs, etc. all on the same dashboard. It makes it easy to pinpoint or correlate our server to this. I can find out if there is lateral movement. This is the biggest advantage of this solution."
"What we are mainly using are the RSA concentrator, RSA Decoder, Archiver, Broker, and Log Decoder."
"Performance and reporting are very good."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation. It can report in real-time and monitor the management."
"The most valuable features are the packet inspection and the automated incident response."
"The most valuable feature is that we can create our own connectors for any application, and NetWitness provides the training and tools to do it."
"The product has a user-friendly interface and a valuable feature for threat intelligence integration."
"The most valuable feature is the hunting ability to work in a CERT."
"We get support in the free version."
"The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall."
"WildFire's application encryption is useful."
"Intuitive threat prevention and analysis solution, with a machine learning feature. Scalable, stable, and protects against zero-day threats."
"You have better control because you define apps. You just don't define ports. You define apps, and the apps are monitored in the traffic. It is more specific than the Cisco firewall when it comes to our needs."
"Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones has improved my organization."
"It gives a more accurate assessment of a virus in terms of whether it's truly a virus, malware, or a false positive. We have some legacy software that could pop up as being something that is malware. WildFire goes through and inspects it, and then it comes back and lets us know if it's a false positive. Usually, when it finds out that it's not a virus, it lets us know that it's benign, and it can exclude it from that scan, which means I don't even have to worry about that one popping up anymore."
"It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN."
"It is not so easy to customize this product."
"Sometimes, it gives me static when integrating Windows-based systems. It should produce a precise log of sorts as to where the problem is. For example, a few days ago because of the McAfee application firewall, I couldn't get access to the particular Windows machine. So, my team and I had to figure out by ourselves that there was a virus responsible for the obstacle. This solution should trigger a meaningful log or message indicating the reason the user or implementer can't get into the machine."
"Lots of competing products have vulnerability protection built into their products, and this solution would be improved by including that support."
"The solution should have more integration capabilities with different platforms."
"We have encountered issues with unresolved crashes."
"Log aggregation is an issue with this solution because there are a huge number of alerts in a single instance."
"The initial setup is very complex and should be simplified."
"They should implement algorithms to digest that data and produce additional, more advanced reporting, alerting and support of internal security teams."
"I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product."
"They can keep on doing more updates. As new malware and viruses are coming out, they can make sure that WildFire is up to date."
"Palo Alto Networks WildFire could improve by adding support for manual submission of suspicious files and URLs. Additionally, it would be an advantage to add rule-based analysis. Currently, it uses only static and AI. We need to be able to analyze archive files."
"Any enhancements should likely be focused on the firewall appliance to further strengthen overall security capabilities, such as refining app and user identity features."
"The technical support response needs improvement."
"The initial setup was a little bit complex, mainly due to the GUI console and management challenges."
"The product fails to offer protection when dealing with high-severity vulnerabilities, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The configuration should be made a little bit easier. I understand why it is as it is, but there should be a way to make it easier from the user side."
NetWitness Platform is ranked 30th in Log Management with 11 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) with 21 reviews. NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of NetWitness Platform writes "A solid SIEM solution that should improve technical support and online resources to be easier to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Intuitive, stable, and scalable zero-day threat prevention solution with a machine learning feature". NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Proofpoint Email Protection, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Fortinet FortiSandbox. See our NetWitness Platform vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire report.
We monitor all Log Management 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.