Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Reviews

We use Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR for several areas of security automation, such as phishing, investigating, mitigating, the detection of impossible travel, and consolidating threat information for our internal systems.

It reduces manual interactions of security analysts. Before they had to check on three, or four different websites to see if something was good or bad. Now, Cortex does all of that for us.

It is very easy to use.

It has an extensive list of integrations that are available out of the box which makes it easy to start.

I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards.

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR has been active for six months. 

We are always on the latest version.

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is pretty stable.

It offers some architecture recommendations to make it really scalable if you choose.

For example, hot standby, bond standby, clustering, and breaking out components in dedicated servers. You can go wild if you want to go wild, but we wanted to keep it easy and stable.

Pretty much network security and SOC are the main users. I believe that we are licensed for 20 users.

We are definitely extensively using this solution. We are currently training many additional teams to be self-sufficient in usage. The usage will increase more and more.

With Palo Alto technical support, if you get to the right people, you get an answer very quickly. 

What I like about the Cortex team is that they have a dedicated select center where you can get service in minutes and that's extremely helpful.

Overall, I am satisfied with the technical support.

We evaluated two or three other vendors. 

We are a very big Palo Alto shop and we needed to have some Palo Alto features, which are implemented now in Cortex. We are pretty much guided in that direction for some of the security features we need for our firewalls.

I would say the initial setup was really straightforward. 

You need to be a little bit aware of Linux unless you buy the hosted version, then you don't need to know anything about it. If you decide you want to run it yourself, you should have some Linux skills because it's a Docker framework on Linux. Knowing a bit about that is handy.

It was up and running in half a day.

It only requires one person to maintain this solution. I do it myself along with many other tasks. In a larger environment, you split into two teams, OS maintenance and application maintenance.

We had help from Palo Alto SE resource for the PoC, but the setup was completed on our own.

We have a concurrent user license. 

The licensing is a pretty high price for a user license per year.

The base product is very cheap, you can even get it for free, but the fee per user is expensive. It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses.

It's a great product, although it might become very pricey if you need several user licenses.

They need to automate everything to reduce the number of user licenses needed. If it is an automated workflow, you don't need to be licensed.

If Cortex sends an email asking a user to say yes or no, you don't need a license for that user. You just need a user license if you want to improve what Cortex does in terms of workbooks, cases, and more.

We evaluated Splunk for six months and decided against it three to six months ago.

Have a very good understanding of what you want to automate. Define the process and make sure the integrations you need are available out of the box.

I would also suggest starting simple. Try easy use cases first and until you feel confident before you get into more complex use cases.

I would rate Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR a nine out of ten.

My primary use for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is to protect the workstation for the end-users.

The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are the remote controller from the workstation that can execute commands and isolate the systems outside of the network. Only the system with an internet connection can execute the task because the main console is in the cloud.

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the look, feel, and management of the cloud console. Additionally, the user could be more easily integrated.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR for two years.

We have approximately 1,000 users using Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR in our organization. The solution is scalable.

We only require one or two staff to deploy the agent of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR because it is very simple. One for the server and the other for the workstation.

The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could be reduced. We are always looking for a discount. There is an annual license needed to use this solution.

I rate Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR a ten out of ten.

I mainly use Cortex XSOAR to automate cybersecurity and the SOC environment.

To minimize manual tasks and increase level of automation. 

Cortex XSOAR drastically reduces trivial tasks inside the SOC environment, which provides a huge benefit for L1 analysts.

Cortex XSOAR's most valuable features are the playbooks, custom integration, the machine-learning model, and the layout, classifier, and mapper.

Corex XSOAR could be improved by reducing the time it takes to process large amounts of data and increasing the number of integrations. In the next release, Palo Alto should include popup features - for example, if someone is working on an incident, it should pop up and display in front of me once it's clicked.

4 years

Cortex XSOAR is very stable in our environment, and we haven't seen any platform issues with it.

Cortex XSOAR is scalable.

Palo Alto's support services require a lot of improvement.

I used Qradar SOAR . Cortex xsoar support is very good and contain lot of OOTB playbooks but comparatively qradar soar lack in OOTB Playbooks. 

The initial setup is very easy. Also in latest version platform is managed by Palo alto cloud itself and rest of the configuration is done from UI itself. 

So zero load in configuring platform. 

Cortex XSOAR's license price could be lower.

I would give Cortex SOAR a rating of eight out of ten.

As an integrator, I have used Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR in various customer environments for a wide range of purposes. This includes improving IT security, streamlining operations, automating incident response actions, creating playbooks with approvals, and enhancing integrations with different security tools. In essence, Cortex XSOAR serves as a versatile platform that helps address multiple cybersecurity and operational needs in organizations.

What I like most about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is how user-friendly it is for development. It is much simpler to work with compared to similar tools I've used. If you can think of it, you can probably do it. However, there are some limitations, but speed isn't one of them.

One limitation I have noticed with Cortex XSOAR is that it doesn't offer automatic threat intel reports out of the box. However, you can achieve this through coding, and we have managed to do it in our own environment using scripts and playbooks. It is not a built-in feature, but it is possible with some coding skills. The good news is that Palo Alto Networks plans to make this process more automated in the future, but it is not available yet.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR for three years.

Cortex XSOAR's stability depends on the right sizing. When sized correctly, it is very stable and I would rate it a strong nine out of ten. But if the sizing is wrong, performance problems can arise. For instance, customers with closed storage systems had issues during heavy workloads. To keep it stable, having at least 3,000 IOPs is advised, especially for customers with high storage needs. So, sizing is key for a successful and stable experience.

Cortex XSOAR is generally scalable and I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. It is a bit challenging to migrate it from a regular database to a high-availability Elastic database, but it is possible. The ease of migration depends on how well it was planned from the start. Overall, it is a good option for scalability, but careful planning is essential for smooth transitions. The engine, which acts as a broker for connections and integrations in Cortex XSOAR, is highly efficient and reliable.

The initial setup of Cortex XSOAR is generally straightforward, but it can get a bit tricky when dealing with a lot of use cases. If you plan to create large playbooks, it is crucial to size the system correctly from the start. Otherwise, you might run into performance issues. Apart from that, there aren't many problems with the implementation process. The challenge mainly revolves around sizing the system correctly, especially when customers have lots of ideas that could make playbooks complex and resource-intensive. So, it is important to plan carefully in such cases. In the best-case scenario, deploying Cortex XSOAR can be done in about 30 minutes when everything is prepared and ready. However, for full integration into the customer's environment, assuming no restrictions or communication issues, it might take roughly two and a half hours.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. My advice to new users would be to plan ahead before implementing Cortex XSOAR. Understand your use cases well and have a solid strategy because the implementation is an ongoing process that you can always improve. Consider creating an adoption plan for what you will do this year and next year in terms of integration and use cases. Keep it user-friendly and introduce use cases gradually to your team instead of overwhelming them all at once. It's about taking steps to make it effective over time.

The solution is used for security. 

Palo Alto is easy to use. 

The dashboard could be better. 

I have used Palo Alto Network Cortex for six months. 

There are issues with stability as it was giving false positives and has bugs. I rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. There are two hundred users using the solution at present. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

The solution was deployed by analysts. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

I'm currently evaluating XSOAR to see what the solution can do. I'm playing around with the various features. 

The drag-and-drop interface enables analysts with no programming knowledge to create playbooks easily. 

XSOAR could have more integration options. 

I have used XSOAR for two months.

XSOAR is stable. 

Setting up XSOAR is straightforward and takes about 30 minutes. It doesn't require any special technology to implement it in any architecture.  You create a virtual machine, move the file to it, launch the installer, and let it run. It doesn't require any complex tasks. 

I rate Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR nine out of 10. 

We use the solution to create playbooks for all the operational programs.

The solution's integration with non-security solutions will be helpful.

We have been using the solution for almost two years now.

The solution is stable. I rate its stability an eight.

I rate the solution's scalability as an eight. It is complex to scale.

The solution's technical support team takes longer to reply to the queries.

Neutral

The solution's initial setup process is straightforward.

The solution's cost is reasonable. I rate its pricing as a five.

I rate the solution an eight.

Our company uses the solution for security management and threat response. 

Many different playbooks are available and can be customized. 

Integrations with other applications are challenging and need to be improved. 

Reports or issues are often duplicated. 

The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches. 

I have been using the solution for seven months. 

The solution has stability issues from the performance side and often duplicates reports or issues.

The solution is not a Palo Alto product so technical support is inadequate. 

There is not a big focus on support for the solution so it takes a lot of time to receive responses for issues. 

The setup might not be easy because it requires official customers. 

Our company received technical support during installation.

The solution is based on an annual licensing model that is expensive. 

The solution is a good product that would be even better if technical support is improved and prices are discounted. 

Support is very important because there is a lot of follow up after implementations to properly manage changes and issues. 

I rate the solution a six out of ten.