We are working on creating security policies on the firewall. We have just put GlobalProtect VPN in our company. We also have Prisma Access.
We have on-prem and hybrid cloud deployments.
We are working on creating security policies on the firewall. We have just put GlobalProtect VPN in our company. We also have Prisma Access.
We have on-prem and hybrid cloud deployments.
It has strengthened our security policies and made our environment more secure. It has provided us more security features. Due to the rules that we have created on Palo Alto Firewall, all the malicious things have been stopped from coming into our environment.
The App-ID feature is the coolest feature because you don't need to open a new port. Apps are directly linked to the port. It provides one of the best ways to lock down the additional port switch.
Its software updates can be improved. It sometimes becomes very slow with the software updates for different features.
It should have an External Dynamic List of data. The malicious IP is not frequently getting updated in Palo Alto, and this should be done.
I have been using this solution for six years.
Its stability is good.
Its scalability is also good.
We were using Cisco ASA previously. Palo Alto has strengthened our security policies. It has also made our environment more secure than Cisco ASA.
Its initial setup is straightforward.
I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewall an eight out of ten. It has been working very well.
We primarily use the solution for traditional firewalling. We use it for VPN connections - especially now that people are doing work from home. This solution is our VPN gateway.
The solution has a lot more features than other firewall solutions, including Cisco, which we also use. It's very rich. There's so much there and we don't use a lot of it, although it is nice to have the option.
The solution itself is very user-friendly and quite easy to use.
You just need a web browser to manage it, unlike Cisco, which requires another management system.
The solution is quite stable.
The initial setup is pretty straightforward.
The scalability is limited and depends on the size of the firewall that you will buy.
The solution is very expensive. There are cheaper options on the market.
I've been using the solution for three years at this point. It's been a while. I have some good experience with it at this point.
The solution has proven itself to be quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable in terms of performance.
The solution can only scale according to the sizing that a company has purchased. It depends on the size of the firewall that you will buy. For example, right now, we have this firewall with 24, which means our scalability is limited to 24.
They do have higher-end models for companies that have planned for bigger deployments.
At this point, we have about 200 users and three admins.
We're happy to use it for our perimeter firewall and so we are not planning to change it anytime soon.
Technical support is okay. We have local vendor support. Whenever we have an issue, we contact them and they help us open a ticket with Palo Alto.
We use both Palo Alto and Cisco as our firewalls. We use them both at the same time.
The initial setup has the same amount of difficulty as, for example, a Cisco setup. Regardless of if it's Cisco or Palo Alto, it will all the same level of effort. However, the use cases will be different from one another.
That said, the whole process is pretty straightforward.
We have three admins on our team that can handle setup and maintenance responsibilities.
The price of the solution is quite high, especially if you compare it to Cisco or Juniper.
The solution is subscription-based. Users can pay monthly or yearly. We pay on a yearly basis.
We are Palo Alto customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with the company.
We work with the 3000-series and tend to use the latest version of the product.
I would recommend the solution to other organizations if their budget supported buying it. Cost-wise, they are on the high side.
Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at an eight. We've largely been satisfied with its capabilities.
My primary use cases for this solution have been the firewall, file analysis, and remote-access VPN.
The graphical interface is easy to troubleshoot because it has a drill-down sequence. It is easy to monitor traffic.
In Mexico, Palo Alto's discounts are significantly lower than Cisco's. They are also more expensive – about 15% or 20% – than Cisco, but their platforms are very similar.
Their tech support is not as available in Mexico as I would like it to be.
I am currently testing Palo Alto and preparing for an exam.
The Global Protect Feature has allowed our organization to support our remote workforce.
I have found it to be reliable and very easy to use. I haven't really encountered many problems with it because its documentation is clear and readily available on their website.
They need to provide documentation for CLI, as most of the commands, we get from Community Forums.
I have been doing research on Palo Alto for the past nine months.
It is stable.
Highly scalable as the HA deployment allows you to pair up to eight devices at once.
I haven't had a chance to contact them.
Palo Alto is my first solution.
Initial setup is easy and subsequent changes have been easy to implement as well.
In-house expertise.
I would say go for it because it seems to be stable and very reliable. I've spoken to some specialists who vouch for Palo Alto. They say they've been using it in their environment, and it hasn't let them down so far.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
It protects from any unwanted traffic or any kind of attack toward your LAN. It just minimizes the risk. It does not completely eradicate the risk.
We have the latest version of this solution.
Application control, IPS, and sandboxing towards the cloud are the most valuable features. It is a very user-friendly product with a very easy-to-use interface.
Its stability can be better. Their technical response from the support side can also be better.
I have been using this solution for a couple of years.
It is stable, but its stability can be better.
If you got the product for 100 users and the company has grown to 500 people, this product will not be scalable. You will need another hardware that has more resources.
Their technical support is very good, but their technical response can be better. You might face some difficulties due to COVID, but they have been very good most of the time. It also depends on the region from where you are calling.
It is very much straightforward. It is a friendly product, but one should have basic knowledge of networking and security.
The deployment duration and the number of people required vary based on the requirements. A security product doesn't work in a way where you just install it, and it starts functioning. You need to keep improvising and updating it. It is an ongoing process for all security products.
You pay based on the kind of license you require, but comparatively, it is not very expensive.
I would recommend this solution to others. If you have internet, you should definitely have a firewall in your network. When you're exposed to the internet, you're exposed to risks. You definitely need a next-generation firewall in corporate networks.
I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls an eight out of ten.
We've put it in hospitals and very large private and government businesses. We have its latest version.
URL filtering and WildFire features are most valuable. It is very user-friendly.
It is a very solid product, and it definitely works.
In the cloud, the HA could be a lot better.
Its price could also be better. It is very expensive.
I have been using this solution for about seven years.
It is very reliable.
Its scalability is very good. We have hundreds of customers.
Their support is very good.
It was pretty straightforward.
It is very expensive. You pay for a year.
I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls a nine out of ten.
We use it for perimeter security.
Overall, it is a good solution. It is stable. We use URL filtering, which is useful for blocking undesired URLs.
Currently, they don't have email protection. They can maybe add it in the future. Currently, if you want to do so, you need to go with another solution.
I have been using this solution for two years.
Its stability is perfect. It has excellent stability.
With this kind of solution, you need to be careful in terms of planning because once you have the appliance, it is very difficult to scale too much. You need to carefully select the right appliances because if you need to run more services and traffic beyond the ones you have selected, you would have to replace the appliance. You would have to upgrade it. We currently have 100 users in our organization who use this solution.
We never had the need to open a support case. It never happened that something that was supposed to work was not working. If required, we can find the answers in the product documentation.
If you have the right experience, it is okay. It is not very easy, but if you know how to manage it and configure it, it is okay. It takes maybe 5 to 10 hours or a day.
I would advise others to go for it. They will not get disappointed. It is complex at the beginning because it has a lot of features, but this is something that you overcome with training. With training and experience, you can manage it.
I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewall a nine out of ten.
We shifted an existing network from Cisco to Palo Alto. It was like a branch to head office network.
We have done public and private cloud deployments as well as on-prem deployments. We are using versions 8, 9, and 10.
IoT security is most valuable in the current version. Content IDs, DDoS protection, zone protection, and DLP are the most prominent features in Palo Alto Networks NG Firewall. It is easier to configure than other solutions.
People sometimes find it more expensive as compared to other solutions. There are also fewer training opportunities for Palo Alto than Cisco and other vendors.
I have been using this solution for the last four or five years.
It is working fine.
Its scalability has been fine for our use cases. It is good for large-scale environments, and there are no problems.
Their technical support is excellent.
It is very straightforward. They also have a very good script, so it runs very smoothly.
It is expensive as compared to other brands.
If we are comparing firewalls, this is the best firewall. I would rate Palo Alto Networks NG Firewall a nine out of ten.
