Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Reviews

We had an internal debate regarding our firewall solution for the cloud. Initially we had a vendor that suggested we could build a whole environment using the Azure firewall, but we had requirements for Zero Trust architecture. We are essentially like a bank. We were planning to host some PCI services in the cloud and we were planning to create all the zones. When we looked at the feature set of Azure, we were not able to find Layer 7 visibility, which we had on our firewalls, and that is where the debate started. We thought it was better to go with a solution that gives us that level of visibility. Our team was comfortable with Palo Alto as a data center firewall, so we went for Prisma Cloud.

The comprehensiveness of the solution for protecting the full cloud-native stack is pretty good. It is doing a good job in three areas: identification, detection, and the response part is also very clear. We are able to see what is wrong, what is happening, and what we allowed, even for troubleshooting. If something goes bad, we need to check where it went bad and where it started. For example, if there is an issue that seems to be performance-related, we are able to look at the logs and the traffic flow and identify if the issue really is performance-related or if it is a security issue. Because we are new to the cloud, we are using a combination of different features to understand what is going on, if the application owner does not know what is wrong. We use the traffic analysis to find out what it was like yesterday or the day before and what is missing. Perhaps it is an authentication issue. We use it a lot for troubleshooting.

We have implemented Palo Alto's SOAR solution, Demisto, and have automated some of the things that our SOC team identified, related to spam and phishing. Those workflows are working very well. Things that would take an analyst between three and six hours to do can now be achieved in five to eight minutes because of the automation capabilities.

Overall, the Palo Alto solution is extremely good for helping us take a preventative approach to cloud security. One of the problems that we had was that, in the cloud, networking is different from standard networking. Although only a portion of our teams is trained on the cloud part, because we had engineers who were using the platform, they were able to quickly adapt. We were able to use our own engineers who were trained in the data center to very quickly be able to work on Prisma Cloud. But when we initially tried to do that with Azure itself, we had a lot of difficulty because they did not have the background in how Azure cloud works.

Also, when you have a hybrid cloud deployment, you will have something on-prem. Maybe your authentication or certain applications are still running on-prem and you are using your gateway to communicate with the cloud. A lot of troubleshooting happens in both the data centers. When we initially deployed, we had separate people for the cloud and for the local data centers. This is where the complication occurred. Both teams would argue about a lot of things. Having a single solution, we're able to troubleshoot very quickly. The same people who work on our Palo Alto data center firewalls are able to use Prisma Cloud to search and find out what went wrong, even though it's a part of the Azure infrastructure. That has been very good for us. They were easily able to adapt and, without much training, they were able to understand how to use Prisma Cloud to see what is happening, where things are getting blocked, and where we need to troubleshoot.

The solution provides the visibility and control we need, regardless of how complex or distributed the cloud environments become. If you have traffic passing through multiple zones and you have your own data center as well, that is where it does the magic. Using Prisma Cloud, we're able to quickly troubleshoot and identify where the problem is. Suppose that a particular feature in Office 365 is not working. The packet capture capability really helps us. In certain cases, we have seen where Microsoft has had bugs and that is one area where this solution has really helped us. We have been able to use the packet capture capability to find out why it was not working. That would not have been possible in a normal solution. We are using it extensively for troubleshooting. We are capturing the data and then going back to the service provider with the required logs and showing them the expected response and what we are getting. We can show them that the issue is on their side.

When it comes to Zero Trust architecture, it's extremely good for compliance. In our data center, we did a massive project on NSX wherein we had seven PCI requirements. We needed to ensure that all the PCI apps pass through the firewall and that they only communicate with the required resources and that there was no unexpected communication. We used Prisma Cloud to implement Zero Trust architecture in the cloud. Even in between the subnets, there is no communication allowed. Only what we allowed is passing through the firewall. The rest is getting blocked, which is very good for compliance.

If I have to generate a report for the PCI auditor, it is very simple. I can show him that we have the firewall with the vulnerability and IPS capabilities turned on, and very quickly provide evidence to him for the certification part. This is exactly what we wanted and is one of the ways in which the solution is helping us.

Another of the great things about Prisma Cloud is that the management console is hosted. That means we are not managing the backend. We just use Prisma Cloud to find out where an issue is. We can go back in time and it is much faster. If you have an appliance, the administration and support of it are also part of your job. But when you have Prisma Cloud, you don't care about those things. You just focus on the issues and manage the cloud appliances. This is something that is new for us and extremely good. Even though we have a lot of traffic, the search and capabilities are very fast, making them extremely good for troubleshooting.

Because the response is much faster, we're able to quickly find problems, and even things that are not related to networking but that are related to an application. We are able to help the developers by telling them that this is where the reset packet is coming from and what is expected.

We are using the new Prisma Cloud 2.0 Cloud Security Posture Management features. For example, there are some pre-built checklists that we utilize. It really helps us identify things, compared to Panorama, which is the on-prem solution. There are a lot of elements that are way better than Panorama. For instance, it helps us know which things we really need to work on, identifying issues that are of high importance. The dashboards and the console are quite good compared to Panorama.

If one of our teams is talking about slowness, we are able to find out where this slowness is coming from, what is not responding. If there is a lock on the database, and issues are constantly being reported, we are able to know exactly what is causing the issue in the backend application.

The main feature is the management console which gives us a single place to manage all our requirements. We have multiple zones and, using UDR [user-defined routing] we are sending the traffic back to Palo Alto. From there we are defining the rules for each application. What we like about it is the ease of use and the visibility.

The application visibility is amazing. For example, sometimes we don't know what a particular custom port is for and what is running on it. The visibility enables us to identify applications, what the protocol is, and what service is behind it. Within Azure, it is doing a great job of providing visibility. We know exactly what is passing through our network. If there is an issue of any sort we are able to quickly detect it and fix the problem.

The solution provides Cloud Security Posture Management, Cloud Workload Protection, Cloud Network Security, and Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management in a single pane of glass. When it comes to anomaly detection, because we have Layer 7 visibility, if there is something suspicious, even though it is allowed, we are able to identify it using the anomaly detection feature. We also wanted something where we could go back in time, in terms of visibility. Suppose something happened two hours back. Because of the console, we are able to search things like that, two hours back, easily, and see what happened, what change might have happened, and where the traffic was coming from. These features are very good for us in terms of investigation.

In addition, there are some forensic features we are utilizing within the solution, plus data security features. For example, if we have something related to financial information, we can scan it using Prisma Cloud. We are using a mixture of everything it offers, including network traffic analysis, user activity, and vulnerability detection. All these things are in one place, which is something we really like.

Also, if we are not aware of what the port requirements are for an application, which is a huge issue for us, we can put it into learning mode and use the solution to detect what the exact port requirements are. We can then meet to discuss which ones we'll allow and which ones are probably not required.

The only part that is actually tough for us is that we have a professional services resource from Palo Alto working with us on customization. One of the things that we are thinking about is that if we have similar requirements in the future, how can we get his capability in-house? The professional services person is a developer and he takes our requirements and writes the code for the APIs or whatever he needs to access. We will likely be looking for a resource for the Demisto platform.

The automation also took us time, more than we thought it would take. We had some challenges because Demisto was a third-party product. Initially, the engineer who is with us thought that everything was possible, but later on, when he tried to do everything, he was not able to do some things. We had to change the strategy multiple times. But we have now reached a point where we are in a comfort zone and we have been able to achieve what we wanted to do.

Also, getting new guys trained on using the solution requires some thought. If someone is already trained on Palo Alto then he's able to adapt quickly. But, if someone is coming from another platform such as Fortinet, or maybe he's from the system side, that is where we need some help. We need to find out if there is an online track or training that they can go to.

Related to training is the fact that changes made in the solution are reflected directly in the production environment. As of now, we are not aware of any method for creating a demo environment where we can train new people. These are the challenges we have.

We have been using Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks for about eight months.

We have not had many issues with the solution's stability, and whatever challenges we have had have been in the public cloud. But with the solution itself there has only been one issue we got stuck on and that was NAT-ing. It was resolved later. We ran into some issues with our design because public internet access was an issue, and that took us some time. But it was only the NAT-ing part where we got stuck. The rest has all been smooth.

As of now, we have not put a load on the system, so we will only know about how it handles that when we start migrating our services. For now, we've just built the landing zones and only very few services are there. It will take like a year or so before we know how it will handle our load.

This is our main firewall solution. We are not relying on the cloud-based firewall as of now. All our traffic is going through Prisma Cloud. Once we add our workloads, we will be using the full capacity of the solution.

We have not had any issues up to now.

We initially tried to use the Azure firewall and the VPC that is available in Azure, but we had very limited capabilities that way. It was just a packet filtering solution with a lot of limitations and we ended up going back to Palo Alto.

The initial setup was straightforward. There was an engineer who really helped us and we worked with them directly. We did not have any challenges.

The initial deployment took us about 15 days and whatever challenges we had were actually from the design side. We wanted to do certain things in a different way and we made a few changes later on, but from the deployment and onboarding perspectives, it was straightforward.

We have a team of about 12 individuals who are using Prisma Cloud, all from the network side, who are involved in the design. On the security side, three people use it. We want to increase that number, but as I mentioned earlier, there is the issue of how we can train people. For maintenance, we have a 24/7 setup and we have at least six to eight engineers, three per shift. Most of them are from the network security side, senior network security engineers, who mainly handle proxy and firewall.

Our implementation strategy included using a third-party vendor, Crayon, who actually set up the basic design for us. Once the design was ready, we consulted with the Palo Alto team telling them that this was what we wanted to implement: We will have this many zones and these are the subnets. It didn't take much time because we knew exactly what our subnets were but also because the team that was helping us had already had experience with deployment.

Our experience with Crayon went well. Our timeline was extremely short and in the time that was available they did an excellent job. We reached a point where the landing zones were ready and whatever issues we had were resolved.

I can't say much about the pricing because we still have not started using the solution to its full capabilities. As of now, we don't have any issues. Whatever we have asked for has been delivered.

If you pay for three years of Palo Alto, it's better. If you're planning on doing this, it's obviously not going to be for one year, so it's better if you go with a three-year license.

The only challenge we have is with the public cloud vendor pricing. The biggest lesson I have learned is around the issues related to pricing for public cloud. So when you are doing your segmentation and design, it is extremely important that you work with someone who knows and understands what kinds of needs you will have in the future and how what you are doing will affect you in terms of costs. If you have multiple firewalls, the public cloud vendor will also charge you. There are a lot of hidden costs.

Every decision you make will have certain cost implications. It is better that you try to foresee and forecast how these decisions are going to affect you. The more data that passes through, the more the public cloud will charge you. If, right now, you're doing five applications, try to think about what 100 or 250 applications will cost you later.

If we had gone with the regular Azure solution, some of the concerns were the logging, monitoring, and search capabilities. If something was getting blocked how would we detect that? The troubleshooting was very complicated. That is why we went with Prisma Cloud, for the troubleshooting.

Microsoft is not up to where Palo Alto is, right now. Maybe in six months or a year, they will have some comparable capabilities, but as of now, there is no competitor.

Before choosing the Palo Alto product we checked Cisco and Fortinet. In my experience, it seemed that Cisco and Forinet were still building their products. They were not ready. We were lucky that when we went to Palo Alto they already had done some deployments. They already had a solution ready on the marketplace. They were quickly able to provide us the demo license and walk us through the capabilities and our requirements. The other vendors, when we started a year ago, were not ready.

If you have compliance requirements such as PCI or ISO, going with Palo Alto would be a good option. It will make your life much easier. If you do not have Layer 7 visibility requirements and you do not have auditing and related requirements, then you could probably survive by going with a traditional firewall. But if you are a midsize or enterprise company, you will need something that has the capabilities of Prisma Cloud. Otherwise, you will have issues. It is very difficult to work with the typical solution where there is no log and you don't know exactly what happened and there is too much trial and error.

Instead of allowing everything and then trying to limit things from there, if you go with a proper solution, you will know exactly what is blocked, where it is blocked, and what to allow and what not to allow. In terms of visibility, Prisma Cloud is very good.

One thing to be aware of is that we have a debate in our environment wherein some engineers from the cloud division say that if we had an Azure-based product, the same engineer who is handling the cloud, who is the global administrator, would have visibility into where a problem is and could handle that part. But because we are using Palo Alto, which has its own administrators, we still have this discussion going on.

Prisma Cloud also provides security spanning multi- and hybrid-cloud environments, which is very good for us. We do not have hybrid cloud as of now, but we are planning, in the future , to be hosting infrastructure on different cloud providers. As of now we only have Azure.

Because Zero Trust is something new for us, we have actually seen a significant increase in alerts. Previously, we only had intra-zone traffic. Now we have inter-zone traffic. Zero Trust deployments are very different from traditional deployments. It's something we have to work on. However, because of the increased security, we know that a given computer tried to scan something during office hours, or who was trying to make certain changes. So alerts have increased because of the features that we have turned on.

We are a system integrator. My organization has a cloud practice, and we focus on cloud security. Predominantly, Prisma Cloud is used to identify misconfigurations in the cloud.

We have been using Prisma Cloud for two specific customers on Azure Cloud. It is quite a new organization, and we currently have two customers, but in my previous organization, we had about eight customers.

We predominantly focus only on the cloud. We don't work with hybrid models. MultiCloud is there, but we haven't worked on MultiCloud as of now. This specific region is more into Azure Cloud. Azure has a data center over here. Therefore, the adoption of AWS or Google is not high in this region. For data compliance, customers want to stick to a cloud vendor that has a data center in this region.

My 18 years of experience is purely in serving the US and Europe markets. I am quite new to the UAE and the gulf region, and I found that this region is not very mature when it comes to cloud security. The majority of the CISOs are not aware of cloud security controls that need to be implemented, and they only speak about traditional security such as EDR, endpoint security, DLP, etc. So, there is a big potential for cloud security, specifically at the containers and serverless layer.

When we evaluated solutions, we carried out PoC not only for two customers but also for the other six accounts, and they were pretty shocked to know that there were a lot of misconfigurations in the cloud. This region lacks cloud security skills, and there are not many cloud security experts or solution architects to design proper architecture. When we carried out the PoC, they became aware of the misconfigurations and security gaps. It helped them to identify the potential risks they have in the cloud. Generally, with security, it is not easy to measure the outcome or gain from a solution because it purely depends on the breach and the data loss, but so far, we have helped two organizations in fully implementing the solution, and the other four are still in the PoC process.

We purely focus on the container and serverless security, and we predominantly work with Cloud Posture Management (CPM). We opted for Prisma Cloud because we found Prisma Cloud to be better in terms of the overall posture and integration. There are other products in the market, but they don't have a complete and broad portfolio range when it comes to containers or serverless functions. Prisma Cloud has good integrations. You can integrate vulnerability management for the overall risk score. When it comes to commercials, costing-wise also, it is far more reasonable for the customers.

It is good for helping us to take a preventative approach to cloud security. It identifies all the controls and gives an overall picture. For example, it tells us the portion that has misconfiguration. So, we can fix that portion. It is a very good preventative tool. Certain customers predominantly use it for one-time assessments, which I don't recommend. It should be an ongoing assessment to have a good incident response as soon as an alert comes in. Normally, people just ask for a weekly report or monthly report to identify their security posture. Instead of that, they should have a real-time incident response solution to act as a preventative tool. As soon as an alert is generated, there must be someone to immediately work on it, and having such a tool really helps.

It provides the visibility and control we need. In my previous organization, we had quite a complex environment with about 30 Kubernetes clusters. As compared to other tools, it provided better insights, but I haven't evaluated it for much more complex architectures. When it comes to serverless architectures, our work has been minimal. Therefore, I cannot confirm or guarantee whether Prisma Cloud will satisfy a highly complex environment.

It gives the overall picture of compliance when it comes to the cloud security portion. We also have a couple of custom dashboards wherein we integrate the security risk score from other tools. Before implementing this solution for the customers, there was no proper mechanism for the cloud. They only had the vulnerability management reports, the SIEM score, or the application VAPT reports, but they did not have any visibility to anything on the cloud in terms of overall compliance and container security. It definitely gave visibility to the CISOs. A lot of people are still concerned about whether the cloud is secure, whether they need to migrate to it, and whether they have proper security controls for containers and serverless security. It gives better exposure to them. We do have proper tools with CISO-enabled dashboards using which they'll be able to see the score. 

It has reduced runtime alerts by 60% to 70%. 

It has reduced the alert investigation time. False positives are reduced. So, we are able to focus on what has been highlighted. At certain times, we need to accept certain changes, and it also gives us the flexibility to mark something as safe. Based on the change control, we can disable the alert so that the alert is not repeated until the change is completed. We have the functionality to do it.

The container and serverless security is most valuable. It is quite a new technology for this region. Even though containers have been there for a long time, the adoption of containers is very minimal in this region. When it comes to using Kubernetes containers in a complex architecture, there is a lack of security in the market. People aren't aware of the security controls or the process for governance. Container security provided by Prisma Cloud is quite good at filling that gap.

We identified two things that we felt would be great to have, but they are under NDA. So, I can't disclose them. Other than those two things, we identified a generic bug in the secret key management service on AWS that needs to be fixed. We reported it to them, and we want them to fix it.

It is very good with predominant cloud vendors, such as AWS, Azure, and GCP, but I am not sure about its efficiency when it comes to other cloud vendors. They should expand its coverage to other cloud vendors such as Alibaba Cloud and Oracle Cloud, which are quite common in this region. I am not sure if they have a full-fledged Oracle Cloud controls evaluation. If they can improve it in terms of the MultiCloud aspect for the organization, it will be helpful, especially in this region.

I have been working with this solution for almost three years. In my previous organization, I worked with it for two years, and it has been about eight months since I joined my current organization. Here also, we have opted for Prisma Cloud.

Its stability is good. We didn’t have any issues with it.

In my earlier organization, we used it for a bigger client with about 3,000 VMs in AWS and about 30 to 40 clusters. We did not have any challenge with its scalability. As we started putting things, it was working well. 

In this organization, we only have two small customers. There is not much workload. We haven't had any issues. It works fine.

In my earlier organization, I worked directly with Prisma Cloud support. Their support was good. My engagement was minimal, but the initial support from them was quite good. When I had some RFCs and RFIs coming in, their turnaround times were quite less. We had a very good rapport with them. We had a specific account manager who handled any RFCs and PoCs. Their support was good, and we didn't have any challenges. 

In this organization, we have been working with a channel partner, and there have been a few challenges because they are also occupied with other proposals and tasks. The same partner also works with other competitor organizations. Overall, I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

In my previous organization, we were using the Skyhigh networks. Earlier, it was Sky network, and later on, McAfee acquired it and made it a CASB and cloud posture management product. We had a couple of challenges with it. So, we evaluated a lot of products and shortlisted Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. 

It is straightforward. They provide two options. You can configure it manually or just grant access. It can then easily sync up. They also provide the cloud formation templates to spin up in minutes. So, it is straightforward and very simple.

It is hard to measure cost savings at this time because it is quite a new investment for the organization. Cost savings will be there in terms of security and reducing the development time and error fixing time, but it will take some time to measure that.

Its price is reasonable as compared to other products. The main challenge is explaining the licensing model to customers. It isn't a problem related to Palo Alto. Commonly, people don't understand cloud licensing or security licensing. When they have fixed virtual machines, they know what they are going to be charged, but when it comes to cloud automation, it is hard for them to get clarity in case of high workloads or when they have enabled auto-scaling, etc. It would be helpful if Palo Alto can educate people on their licensing programs.

We evaluated multiple products after I came into this organization. We evaluated various CSPM and container security products, such as Aqua Security and Rapid7.

Nowadays, every vendor has come up with a cloud posture management tool. So, we carried out a couple of PoCs in specific customer accounts that had an almost similar type of infrastructure, and based on the outcome, we found Prisma Cloud to be better in terms of identification of miscontrols and security. The cost also played a major role. As compared to other products, it was reasonable. So, the feature set for fulfilling customer requirements and the cost were the two factors that played a major part.

The third factor was the flexibility to work with the vendor. In terms of partnership and support, we felt that being a Palo Alto product, Prisma Cloud would be better. Palo Alto has better service over here, and their channel partners are quite flexible to work with on initial customer demonstration and other things. We felt much more comfortable with Prisma Cloud in all these three aspects.

When it comes to its security automation capabilities, currently, not every customer prefers to automate. We have been trying to implement automation, and when the right access was given, we did a certain amount of automation to immediately block the firewall rules or revoke access when any privileged access has been given. We have been doing a little bit of automation, and it has been good. We are able to achieve our goals. Out of two customers in this company and eight customers in my previous company, only three customers preferred to do automation to a certain extent. The rest of them wanted the alerts to be sent to the incident response team of their SOC. They wanted their team to act upon them. They only allowed us to automate high severity ones or highly critical ones. For example, they only allowed us to automate things like immediately blocking access to specific ports or IPs, but we haven't tried the automation to a full extent.

It enables you to integrate security into your CI/CD pipeline and add touchpoints into existing DevOps processes. We implemented it for just one use case. Before that, we were using Qualys Container Security in the CI/CD pipeline. After switching to Prisma Cloud, I did not have an opportunity to evaluate it completely because I moved to another organization. In my previous organization, we had expertise in DevOps. We had a dedicated DevOps team with almost six years of experience in automating the entire deployment of servers infrastructure, as well as applications. It was pretty easy for them to implement or integrate any security tool into the CI/CD pipeline. In my current organization, we don't have an expert team, and we struggle a bit in implementing things because there are multiple CI/CD deployments from Jenkins to Amazon's native one and Git. So, we take support from Palo Alto to get things deployed during the PoCs. In my previous organization, it was also easier for us to implement because the training provided from the Palo Alto side was quite good, and we had a lot of training materials in the partner portal. We utilized them. We got in touch with the technical team, and we implemented things quite faster, but here, there is a bit of lag because we don't have expertise in DevOps for implementations or integrations.

It can provide risk clarity at runtime and across the entire pipeline, showing issues as they are discovered during the build phases. Shifting your security to the left cuts down the entire life cycle of application deployment, and it does help to fix the security issues at the beginning of the development life cycle itself. We have not seen a large amount of time being cut down. That's because, typically, teams deploy the code, and then initiate a security scan. By integrating these things into the early development cycle, the time can be cut down to three weeks from about one and half months.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use Prisma Cloud primarily for clients with a multi-cloud environment who require all these posture checks to be done uniformly from a single pane of glass to ensure they are in compliance. They have regulatory policies that require integration with the SIEM to generate alerts and reports. That's the primary use case for a CSPM solution. For cloud workload protection, we need vulnerability management, runtime defense, as well as image, container,  and registry scanning.

In terms of modules, we started with Redlock, the cloud security posture management component, and followed with Twistlock for cloud workload protection. Lately, I've been using Aporeto for identity-based micro-segmentation and BridgeCrew for cloud security.

Identity-based micro-segmentation allows you to create microparameters across workloads on the cloud and on-premises. You can enforce a pure wireless model through whitelisting flows in various workloads. Cloud security is primarily for core security, including SaaS and PaaS tools for scanning container images and core infrastructure. We have Terraforms, which we need to scan if we forget to remove any passwords or if there is some consideration drift between what you've configured in the IaC and what has materialized into the cloud infrastructure. 

I don't think we have had more than four or five admins for any project. We provide read-only access to the monitoring guys and custom authentication authorization privileges to a couple of users. The number of authorized users varies from plan to plan. Lots of people don't need to have access to the solution. 

Prisma Cloud helped us with compliance. Most of my deployments have been greenfield, so I don't have a benchmark to compare how the security posture has improved. I've always used this from day zero of the configuration. However, I can say that the compliance checks for PCI, DSS, HIPAA, etc., made my life simpler. I don't need to look at each of these standards and compare the rules I have in place.

It also enabled us to adopt a preventative approach to security. It gives us an option to monitor and remediate, so I don't think there is any challenge. If we see something going wrong, the solution offers a way to implement preventative controls. 

You can incorporate Prisma into DevSecOps and put it into any of the pipelines, like Jenkins and Azure DevOps. I don't think there are any challenges. You have all the ready-made plugins on these CI/CD tools, so you don't need to do or write a custom script plugin or anything. It's already available. It takes care of your end-to-end security from build to deployment and runs.

The cloud workload protection module Twistlock has ready-made plugins. Still, I don't think there was a plunging for identity-based micro-segmentation sites in the past, so we had to build a pipeline manually, I think they released a plugin for IBMS, but I never worked on it.

Prisma provides a single pane of glass for all our cloud resources to control all these different functionalities from various menus. It also helps us assess risk at runtime and throughout the whole pipeline. I have never compared Prisma with other tools, like Qualys or Tenable, so I cannot say which gives better results regarding runtime. However, I get a lot of actionable insights and suggestions from the tool about the next steps to follow.

The solution provides excellent security coverage of multi-cloud and hybrid environments. Without it, I would need to create a manual playbook for each cloud. There is a lot to maintain for each cloud, and you can't monitor from a single pane of glass. That's an administrative nightmare because you can't pull compatible reports. If I identify some compliance issues on AWS, I don't have a similar set of parameters to compare those for Google Cloud or Microsoft Azure. I definitely need this for a multi-cloud environment. 

I can get a relatively good amount of end-to-end security within the cloud. All these pieces fit together to address all my cloud needs. Of course, I don't think any vendors target security within the microservices, analytics, or data warehouse. I'm unsure because I haven't done it, but I don't think anything is missing.

It gives developers the tools they need to correct issues so they do not have to write their own scripts. Sometimes, I need an administrator to work with these developers, so it's not fully automated. Maybe I didn't find the best way to do it. Perhaps I need to find a linter or something, but there were many instances where I needed to involve someone to work with the developer. I don't think we are doing everything from the developer's end. 

Prisma also substantially reduced alert investigation times because we previously did everything by hand. We used to scan it manually, so it depended on the periodicity of scans. Earlier, we used to run scans for a couple of customers about every 15 days, and then we did the remediation. Now, all these scans run every minute or 15 minutes, so it's faster.  

Prisma's identity-based micro-segmentation is better than all its competitors. I've already evaluated Guardicore and Illumio, but Prisma stands out for the ease of configuring rules and how seamlessly it works with your cloud workloads and container environments. I used it for Kubernetes as well as K3s. I prefer Prisma's identity-based micro-segmentation. I can't think of any competitors doing this as well as Prisma Cloud.

We integrated this solution as a part of DevSecOps, so we have a dedicated pipeline for cloud workload protection. That works brilliantly. You don't need to log in to the control unless you want to do some management or full reports. I can bake in all these functionalities within the pipeline, and I can do the same for IBMS. 

As part of application security or whatever my developers are working on, I can have them bake all the configurations they need to do, like listening and patching remediation. I think it's relatively automatic, but I would consider it to be more of a DevSecOps functionality.

Prisma is the result of multiple Palo Alto acquisitions, like CWPP, Twistlock, and Aporeto. Though they are part of a single pane of glass, there is no correlation between the solutions. I don't see vulnerability scans done for tools that have been micro-segmented. 

A better correlation between the multiple products Prisma Cloud contains would be crucial. It would reduce the time spent looking at reports and enable you to get all the actionable insights across products. I think that Palo Alto is working on it, but they need to work faster because it doesn't make sense to have all these products in a single pane of glass without any correlation between them. 

At some point, things get a bit unwieldy when working with complex environments, but I don't think that challenge is unique to Prisma Cloud. It's an issue for any solution deployed in massive and complex environments. Let's say you have an enterprise with 30,000 workloads in the cloud, so it's unwieldy to have it configured for a single instance of Prisma Cloud. In that case, it would be better to segregate it across multiple tenants.

In the future, I'd like to see Palo Alto create a single consolidated agent software for workload production and identity-based micro-segmentation. Currently, I need to install two agents for the same platform to get two different functionalities. The second is maybe ease of licensing. That would also be helpful.

I have been using Prisma Cloud for nearly three and a half years.

I never faced any challenges because of internal hardware issues or the agent. Because I've always worked on the cloud-managed version, we have never faced any problems with the functionality. We did have a couple of hangups with the user and administrator onboarding and privileges, but I don't think that affects the functionality of the overall product.

The product itself is scalable, but it can become unwieldy from the administrative side of things. I can push Prisma Cloud out for 10,000 workloads, but the reporting and management would be a bit difficult. I prefer to have it segmented across multiple tenants, but it's somewhat complicated. 

I rate Palo Alto support a nine out of ten. My company is a CPSP partner with premium support, so I can't speak to the typical support experience. Even if we don't raise a ticket, we have an internal account manager to take care of all this. 

Positive

Redlock was the original company doing CSPM, so I got into Prisma Cloud because they acquired Redlock. I previously used  Qualys and Tenable for vulnerability management. I thought putting the CSPM and cloud workload protection pieces of Prisma Cloud under one roof would simplify my life.

Also, all these are cloud-managed and take care of the end-to-end requirements for cloud workloads. Qualys and Tenable have all these vulnerability management capabilities, but they might lack some native remediation capabilities. It's not that the other products are falling short, but I need that consolidated single pane of glass for cloud security. 

Setting up Prisma Cloud is straightforward. You get an activation email and deploy a couple of scripts. I work for a consulting firm that is a CPSP partner. All I needed to do is email Palo Alto with a bill of material describing our environment and the components, and then we get the activation email. After that, I followed the self-service enrollment steps, and it's running. Depending on your environment, you need to install all these applications. It's a seamless onboarding experience.

The total deployment time varies depending on the client because some of them have restrictions. One mid-sized company with around 700 workloads took less than three weeks. However, we needed to do a step-by-step approach for some, moving from the on-premises environment to the cloud and from dev to production. Those deployments took a couple of months.

Usually, the deployment requires no more than two or three people, but it depends on the approach. One should be enough if it's a batch approach. I've been doing this alone for a lot of my clients. In some situations, if you may need some help troubleshooting an app that isn't working, or the client may need someone with specialized expertise. It also depends on the client's size. At most, you'll need a half-dozen.

It's a costly solution, so we spend a lot on the licenses. At the same time, we can perform compliance checks, external audits, etc., faster because we have all the right pieces in place. That definitely helped, but I've never calculated the total cost of ownership or return on investment.

Prisma Cloud Enterprise is a costly solution. You need a license for all the components. At the same time, you have everything under one roof, so I think it's still justified. 

I rate Prisma Cloud an eight out of ten. I deduct a couple of points because I would still like to see all the products in the platform correlated. They should also do away with the need to install multiple agents for various functionalities or burn it all down into a single agent that takes care of it.

My advice is to start early if you are moving from on-premises to a hybrid or cloud environment. Implement Prisma Cloud as soon as possible, especially for greenfield deployments. This isn't a problem with Prisma Access, but it's usually a challenge. You need time to customize your rules and tailor them to your setup. 

The second recommendation I have is for Prisma Cloud Compute, the cloud workload protection piece. It's available in self-managed and cloud versions. You should opt for the cloud-managed version because you can get two single-cloud platforms. 

The main reason why we are using Prisma Cloud is to identify any compliance issues. We have certain compliance requirements across our different resources, such as something should be completely inaccessible, logging should be enabled, and certain features should be enabled. So, we are using it to identify any such gaps in our cloud deployment. Basically, we are using it as a Cloud Security for Posture Management (CSPM) tool.

It is a SaaS solution. 

One of the things that we have been able to do with Prisma Cloud is that we have been able to generate real-time alerts and share them with our technology team. For certain resources, such as databases, we have certain P1 requirements that need to be fulfilled before our resource goes live. With Prisma, if we identify any such resource, then we just raise an alert directly with the support team, and the support team gets working on it. So, the turnaround time between us identifying a security gap and then closing it has gone down drastically, especially with respect to a few of the resources for which we have been able to put this plan into motion. We have reduced the timeline by 30%. That's because the phase of us identifying the gaps manually and then highlighting them to the team is gone, but the team still needs to remediate them. Of course, there is a provision in Prisma Cloud where I can reduce it further by allowing auto-remediate, but that is not something that we have gone for as an organization.

We are using it to find any gaps, create custom policies, or search in our cloud because even on the cloud portal, you don't get all the details readily available. With Prisma, you have the capability of searching for whatever you're looking for from a cloud perspective. It gives you easy access to all the resources for you to find any attribute or specific values that you're looking for in an attribute. Based on my experience with Azure and Prisma, search becomes much easier via Prisma than via your cloud.

As a pure-play CSPM, it is pretty good. From the data exposure perspective, Prisma Cloud does a fairly good job. Purely from the perspective of reading the conflicts, it is able to highlight any data exposures that I might be having.

There are two main things that Palo Alto should look into. The first is the reporting piece, and the second one is the support. 

Currently, custom reports are available, but I feel that those reports are targeting just the L1 or L2 engineers because they are very verbose. So, for every alert, there is a proper description, but as a security posture management portal, Prisma Cloud should give me a dashboard that I can present to my stakeholders, such as CSO, CRO, or CTO. It should be at a little bit higher level. They should definitely put effort into reporting because the reporting does not reflect the requirements of a dashboard for your stakeholders. There are a couple of things that are present on the portal, but we don't have the option to customize dashboards or widgets. There are a limited set of widgets, and those widgets don't add value from the perspective of a security team or any professional who is above L1 or L2 level. Because of this, the reach of Prisma Cloud in an organization or the access to Prisma Cloud will be limited only to L1 and L2 engineers. This is something that their development team should look into.

Their support needs to be improved. It is by far one of the worst support that I have seen.

We are using Azure Cloud. With AWS, Prisma is a lot more in-depth, but with Azure, it's still developing. There are certain APIs that Prisma is currently not able to read. Similarly, there were certain APIs that it was not able to read six months ago, but now, it is able to review those APIs, top-up resources, and give us proper security around that. Function apps were one of those things that were not there six months ago, but they are there now. So, it is still improving in terms of Azure. It is much more advance when it comes to AWS, but unfortunately, we are not using AWS. A problem for us is that in terms of protecting data, one of the key concepts is the identification of sensitive data, but this feature is currently not enabled for Azure. This feature is there for AWS, and it is able to read your S3 buckets in the case of AWS, but for Azure, it is currently not able to do any identification of your storage accounts or read data on the storage to give security around that. So, that is one of the weak points right now. So, from a data exfiltration perspective, it needs some improvement.

It is currently lacking in terms of network profiles. It is able to identify new resources, and we do get continuous alerts from Prisma when there is an issue, but there have been a few issues or glitches. I had raised a case with Palo Alto support, but the ticket was not going anywhere, so I just closed the ticket. From a network security group's point of view, we had found certain issues where it was not able to perform its function properly when it comes to the network profile. Apart from that, it has been working seamlessly. 

I've been using Prisma Cloud for around six months.

It is a stable platform. Especially with it being a SaaS platform, it just has to make API calls to the customers' cloud portals. I haven't found any issues with regard to stability, and I don't foresee any issues with stability based on the architecture that Prisma has.

It is pretty scalable. The only limitation is the licensing. Otherwise, everything is on the cloud, and I don't see any challenges with respect to scalability. I would consider it as a scalable solution.

Currently, there are around eight to 10 people who are working with Prisma, but we are still bringing it up to maturity. So, majorly, I and a couple of my colleagues are working with Prisma. The others have the account, but they are not active with respect to Prisma. Almost all of us are from InfoSec.

The support from Palo Alto needs to be improved a lot. It is by far one of the worst support services that I have seen. It takes a lot of time for them to come back, and nothing conclusive happens on the ticket as well. 

There was a ticket for which I called them for three months, and nothing was happening on that ticket. They were just gathering evidence that I had already shared. They asked for it again and again, and I got frustrated and just closed the ticket because I was just wasting my time. I was not getting any response. There was no progress that I was seeing in getting my issue getting resolved even after three months. This is not just for one ticket. There have been a couple of other tickets where I've faced similar issues with Palo Alto. So, support is definitely something that they should look into. 

Today, I won't recommend Palo Alto Prisma to someone because I'm not confident about their support. Their support is tricky. I would rate them a three or four out of 10. They are polite and have good communication skills, but my requirement from the support team is not getting fulfilled.

We haven't used any other product. 

I've been involved with the entire implementation of Prisma Cloud. I've manually done the implementation of Prisma in my current organization in terms of fine-tuning the policies, reviewing the policies, and basically bringing it up to maturity. We have not yet achieved maturity with the product. We have also encountered some problems with the product because of which the implementation has been a bit delayed.

The integration piece is pretty straightforward. In terms of the availability of the documentation, there is no issue. If you reach the right document, your issue gets resolved automatically, and you don't have to go to the support team. That was pretty smooth for me.

The initial integration barely took half a day. You just have to make some changes on your cloud platform, get the keys, and just put the keys manually. We had a lot of subscriptions, and when we were doing the integration, tenant-level integration was not available. So, I had to manually integrate or rather onboard each subscription. That's the reason why it took me half a day. It might have even been just a couple of hours.

As of now, we have not seen an ROI because we are not yet mature. We have not yet reached the maturity level that we want to reach.

My colleague had reviewed other solutions like Aqua and Cloudvisory. One of the reasons for selecting Prisma was that we have planned a multi-cloud approach, and based on our analysis, we felt that Prisma will be better suited for our feature requirements. The other reason was that we already have quite a few Palo Alto products in our environment, so we just thought that it will be easier for us to do integrations with Prisma. So, these were the two key reasons for that decision.

Currently, there are not many options to choose from across different products. So, from that perspective, Prisma is pretty decent. It works how CSPMs are supposed to work. They have to read up the config, and then throw you an alert if they find any misconfiguration. So, from that perspective, I didn't find it to be that different from other CSPMs. The integration pieces and other things are pretty simple in Prisma Cloud, which is something that we can take into account when comparing it with others.

I would recommend others to consider a CSPM product, whether they go with Prisma or another flavor of CSPM. It also depends on the deployment that the organization has, the use case, and the budget. For an organization similar to mine, I would definitely recommend going for CSPM and Palo Alto Firewall.

I would advise others to not go with the higher level of Prisma support. They should go for third-party professional services because, in my experience, they have a better understanding of the product than the Prisma support team. Currently, we have one of higher levels of support, and we are not getting the return on that support. If we go for a lower tier of support, we save that money and give it to a third-party professional service. That would be a better return on investment.

Prisma Cloud hasn't helped us to identify cloud applications that we were unaware that our employees were using. That has not been the case so far because when we had initially done the deployment, we had done it at the subscription level rather than at the tenant level. So, in our case, it is quite the opposite where there would be subscriptions that the client is not aware of. I think Prisma has come up with a release wherein we can integrate our cloud on a tenant level rather than the subscription level. That is something that we will be doing going forward.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10.

We use it for visibility, compliance, and governance. It is the official CSPM solution for our bank.

The only module we are using is the compliance module.

In Prisma Cloud, we were able to create frameworks using the RQL language, frameworks that are modeled after our Archer security baselines. Archer is the tool that we used to track all exceptions and security baselines. With Prisma Cloud we have been able to create custom baselines, based on the Archer framework that we have, and not just go off of CIS or NIST frameworks. 

We have also been able to generate reports for teams using the automated scripting tools that Prisma Cloud provides. On a weekly basis, we share those reports with the teams that are impacted. They go back and remediate their findings as needed, or we fine-tune the Prisma Cloud compliance language as needed if there is any ambiguity in there. 

Over the course of a few weeks, the teams remediate these issues and our compliance percentage goes up. Our compliance percentage for production environments was 95 percent. We then made some new acquisitions and they were at 40 or 50 percent, which was very bad. When we brought them under our company's umbrella, we gave them these reports, and they improved their compliance percentage. That has been helping us hugely.

Also, it does a good job of providing a view of our overall posture. Our confidence in our security and compliance posture was what I would describe as a "head in the sand" type of situation before. People would say, "Ah, we should be okay." But once we started digging into stuff and started putting our Archer baselines into the Prisma Cloud queries, that's when we realized that things looked poorer than we had imagined or assumed. This has been a wake-up call for our organization, and everybody has taken notice that we really have a hard job ahead of us.

In addition, with this solution we are seeing a single pane of glass to protect all of our cloud resources and appliances. We are seeing multiple occurrences with multiple platforms under one roof. That has really helped to simplify things.

Prisma Cloud does have some good investigation built into it. When an alert is generated, it does a good job at correlation, not the greatest in the world, but it gives you a good starting point. So it has helped us work on those alerts or investigate them more easily. It reduces our investigation time by 40 to 50 percent because it does all the initial investigation and puts all the findings together. You don't have to manually log into a lot of different accounts or tools to find out that information.

Financially, the only way I can think of that the solution has improved things is in our compliance structure. We spend less time after audits by putting in the effort beforehand. Recently, we have had a lot of good wins where audits have not been able to find a lot of issues. In the past, they used to find 15 or 16 findings, and now, they're able to find only one or two. When you have fewer audit findings, you have fewer man-hours dedicated to dealing with them. We are able to move those man-hours into our actual work rather than just audit work. We have been able to achieve some productivity there. I would estimate it has saved us 5 to 10 percent, in terms of money.

The most valuable feature is the option to add custom queries using the RQL language that they supply so that we can customize the compliance frameworks to what we need to look for.

The comprehensive view that it offers, the compliance percentage based on a framework for a particular account or a particular environment, is extremely useful. We can give those reports to the individual application teams so that they can remediate the findings. It also helps that we can give them read-only access, so we don't even get involved. They log in on their own and can pull a report, based on our instructions, and then do the remediation themselves. It helps us not be the middleman and not waste our time just generating reports for the application teams.

Also, Prisma Cloud provides security for multi and hybrid-cloud environments. We started off using it for our AWS environments, but now Azure and GCP are starting to come into play. We haven't started using those yet, we have just started initial discussions with them, but it has already been decided that Prisma Cloud would be the CSPM even for our Azure and GCP environments.

One definite area for improvement is the auto-remediation or the CWP area. 

The second one is the RQL language. It is still not very flexible and does not cover a lot of use cases. The RQL language could be dramatically improved to add more options. The cloud is adding more and more complexity in terms of number of services or the number of options for each service, especially when it comes to security options like encryption at rest and encryption in transit. And there is the issue of the interlinking of these services. One cloud service uses another cloud service, like CloudFront in front of a load balancer. These interactions are creating numerous new combinations and the RQL language really needs enhancement to handle those queries. 

We ourselves have put in a lot of enhancement requests to Palo Alto, looking at these corner cases, so they can look into those and improve them.

I have been using Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks for about two years.

Prisma Cloud is a little slow, but it is fairly stable.

It is a scalable solution. No matter how many accounts you add, it still can scale. Even the reports that we set up run pretty quickly. They have done a good job of making their platform scalable.

We have been acquiring companies quite a bit recently so we will be using Prisma Cloud heavily. This is our only company-approved CSPM tool. Even though we have some of the native tools in use, like Security Hub from AWS, or Azure Security Center, now called Defender for Cloud in Azure, the official CSPM is Prisma Cloud. It is the center of attraction for us so it is being used by everybody. In the future, we will be adding more accounts as needed until a decision is made on Wiz. We still have a good amount of time left in our Prisma Cloud contract, so we are not looking to switch to Wiz anytime soon.

Technical support is excellent. We have a dedicated account manager from Prisma Cloud who has an office hours session every Monday, and he also attends our standup calls. If Prisma Cloud has any new improvements or any updates that we might be interested in, he brings them up on those calls. We also have a weekly knowledge-sharing session where Prisma Cloud's personnel come in and make a 30-minute presentation and address the enhancement requests that we put in. They'll tell us what updates have happened, what improvements have happened, et cetera.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It was done by one of our team leads, who is a cloud security fellow. He used to be a senior cyber security engineer. It took him three months of full-time work to set up those compliance frameworks, the custom RQL queries based on our Archer baseline, and then, import all the accounts. The importing of the accounts is pretty straightforward. They provide an API or you can even import manually. That's not at all a problem.

We have 10 to 15 users in the solution. Four or five of us are from cloud security proper, and we have administrative rights. Our cloud operations team, seven or eight people, looks at the alerts and investigates and resolves them. They engage us if they need any assistance because they're not very cloud aware yet. And we have a few pilot users who are from the application teams, and they have a read-only role. They generate a report for themselves. Many people still want spoon-feeding and say, "Can you generate a report for us or give us a screenshot of this and that?" We do that occasionally, but we are trying to move away from that process.

For maintenance, there are only two of us, and one of us is doing it full-time, more or less. The other one is more of a standby. We are documenting the procedures. We do weekly maintenance in Prisma Cloud, where we make sure the users are onboarded, there are no stale users, and take care of the general upkeep of the tool. The idea is that, in the future, we'll probably get a junior engineer for that role, while the senior engineer can perform enhancements or more advanced configurations.

When it comes to protecting the full cloud-native stack, Prisma Cloud is fairly okay. Compared to other tools out there, I don't think it is an extremely good product, but it's a reasonably okay product to work with. I've used Wiz in the past, and Wiz does a better job on full native-cloud security.

For example, there is the auto-remediation feature in Wiz, which Prisma Cloud eventually caught up to. Wiz also has agentless scanning that Prisma Cloud is, again, catching up to. There is also Terraform code scanning for CI/CD pipelines that Wiz came up with, ISC code scanning, et cetera. Those are some of the excellent features of Wiz.

Wiz also offers granular compliance frameworks in the sense that you could write your own compliance queries and make them part of a framework. Prisma Cloud's RQL is not that flexible. We are still running into some issues in some corner cases where there are no RQL queries available.

Prisma Cloud's security automation capabilities are very basic. Prisma Cloud is primarily a CSPM, not a CWPP. Even Wiz does not offer that many automation capabilities; they were coming out just at the end of the last year. But compared to other products that I have worked with, which are purely CWPP, Prisma Cloud would not even come close.

I would rate Prisma Cloud at about six out of 10 for helping to take a preventative approach to cloud security. It gets the job done. Our company has invested money in it, so we can't move away from it for another two or three years. But we are already piloting Wiz to see if we like it. Once the contract with Prisma Cloud is up, we will probably jump to Wiz. That's the idea within the company.

If I were to rate Prisma Cloud from one to 10, I would maybe rate it at six, while Wiz would be a nine.

We have started using some of the modules for securing the entire cloud-native development cycle across build, deploy, and run, but we have not really operationalized them. They're in the initial phases. It's not the maturity of Prisma Cloud that's in question, it's about the maturity of our company as a whole. Our company was not really tuned to CI/CD, secure DevOps, and the like, so we are slowly starting to integrate that. We haven't seen the results yet, but I would say it's very promising on that front at this time.

My advice would be to compare other products and understand what you want to do before you purchase or implement it.

I work for a monetary provider and handle around five customers. We mostly use Prisma Cloud for CSPN, but we have a banking customer using CWPP. 

Apart from those two use cases, the other customers are not interested in Prisma Cloud's other functionalities because they're green and already have other solutions with partners that they say are more mature. We have not implemented them in the customers' production environment, but we have toyed around with proofs of concept.

My organization is not primarily a customer. We don't use it a lot because we're a security company that mainly provides customers with solutions using this. That said, visibility is the most significant benefit for our clients because some are so large that they're unaware of what they have. 

They don't have adequate governance over expenses, security, and the parts of the network that are communicating. Prisma Cloud gives them reports that will provide instant insight into what's there. A new feature creates a visual map of networks and communications in the discovery part. It's excellent because you can instantly visualize everything. That's one feature that all the customers appreciate.

It performs well in complicated cloud environments. You only need to add your cloud account credentials. Most of the time, Palo Alto recommends using a full admin account for a service account accessing the tool. The tool works just as well, regardless of the company size. That's one of Prisma's biggest strengths. No matter how big you are, the tool can see everything.

Prisma Cloud can scan any cloud provider. We currently use Prisma on GCP, Amazon, Azure, and Alibaba. We also have Oracle, but I haven't used it for Oracle yet. This is crucial because some customers aren't proficient in managing multiple cloud environments. They only need to go to Prisma Cloud and see what they have because the team managing security is not the same one developing the solutions. 

Prisma offers a single pane of glass that lets you do most of what you want in one place. It's not only configurations but also knowing what you have, and your assets are doing. That's the main selling point of Prisma Cloud. It provides you with visualized reports, whether it's in the cloud, live serverless, containers, etc. 

I haven't toyed with CAB personally, but I think you can do that because you can scan images and deployments. I wouldn't say it gives you a lot of value in that regard because most of the CI/CD issues are application-level problems that Prisma Cloud or any other tool wouldn't help you with. Regarding security, you can deploy agents during the integration deployment and gain complete visibility with total memorability that you might introduce in the pipeline. Still, I think it will be a tiny part of the pipeline.

You will not see the problem if you're running an OGs application. While the developers can pinpoint the issue with the information provided, it will never relate to a piece of code and solve it. No tool can tell you exactly which part of the application is the problem, but a tool can identify which process has a vulnerability. Apart from that, many developers have issues finding the root cause of the vulnerability. When it's a library-related vulnerability, the TVD tells you to use another library or play the library. When your own code has the vulnerability, it's hard to pinpoint that.

Prisma provides a lot of information. You can see real-time alerts and forward them to JIRA or whatever tool you use with API or TVD. It also offers anomaly detection. If an administrator is logging in at weird times and doing strange functions, this tool can notify you about them. The anomaly detection is a correlation engine. You seldom get false positives. When it is a false positive, it's something you would expect. The only times I got a false positive were when the administrator forgot the password and tried logging in 50 times. At that point, they just need to contact support and change the password. 

Prisma has massively reduced our alert investigation times. It's 50 times quicker. Without this tool, we must dig up AWS logs, and the format isn't too accessible. The difference between using this tool to investigate an issue compared to a cloud-native solution is two hours versus two minutes. Digging up two logs using Ctrl-left is not the best approach, and it's the only approach cloud providers give you. 

The solution saved us because it helps us turn off idle machines. Most are machines we have turned on, and we didn't know what they do, but we didn't want to turn them off. Prisma Cloud lets you see the communication flows and the asset's actions on the communication map. If you see a device not communicating, it's easier to investigate what it's doing. Sometimes, it's a device generating reports at a particular time. You can schedule it to turn off when it's not active to save money. You also save money by spending less time solving your issues.

Doing cloud compliance without this tool would be impossible because cloud solutions are huge and highly complex. SOS compliance requires that you provide reports in under 24 hours. That's not possible without an automated tool like Prisma Cloud and the CSPN module. You would need to purchase Prisma or a competitor. It helps a lot because some customers have weird compliance requirements, and you can do it all on Prisma Cloud.

You can create custom compliance configurations according to your customer's needs and set Prisma up to provide the reports every 24 hours. In fact, you can do reports in 10-minute intervals or in real time. The client can access the dashboard and see if they're compliant. C-level executives in any company love that. 

The most valuable features are the alerts and auto-remediation because it allows us a lot of flexibility to customize and do functions the Palo Alto team never intended. We faced some challenges with certificates because we also have next-gen firewalls. We would like to equip all the traffic because there have been many cases in which the developers have made mistakes. Deploying certificates on virtual machines can be complex in a development environment, but we managed to do that with Prisma Cloud.

Prisma performs well in a fully cloud-native stack if you run several layers and Kubernetes. It's not so smooth if you migrate VMs into the cloud. Some customers try to do that with Prisma Cloud, but it's not compatible with Windows Server. However, you can deploy serverless containers without issue. You must deploy personal cloud agents into the virtual machines. The agents are called defenders. That module is excellent because you can see communications and vulnerabilities across your environment. It can also scan for malware. It tries to do many tasks at once, say the value it provides is the ability to see communications between devices.

The agent can block the traffic trying to exploit the vulnerability, but it can't fix the problem. That's on the application level. Most of the time, you give the application development team the vulnerability report, and they fix the issue, but Prisma protects you in the meantime. You can sleep well knowing that the agent is blocking the malicious traffic.

They recently added a module called Code Security that enables you to scan repositories or infrastructure as code. You can see concept errors like CSPN problems before the deployment. In tab use cases, it's excellent because you can see if there are misconfigurations in Terraform without having to deploy the instance or whatever you are deploying. That can save you money because sometimes people are deploying machines with problems that are easily fixable. It also improves security because you can fix a vulnerability before you have it with Cloud Security, but that's a rather new solution.

The IMD feature could be improved, but Palo Alto is working on that. It's a relatively new module that attempts to identify unnecessary permissions. Prisma Cloud is a platform that adds new modules whenever Palo Alto acquires a company or develops a new solution. The development team is trying to add new features. It also has Click Code Security for infrastructure security, but it doesn't add much value unless your DevOps team is really junior.

While Prisma provides a lot of visibility, it also creates a ton of work. Most customers that implement Prisma Cloud have thousands of alerts that are urgent. It creates a high workload initially. Apart from that, it solves the problems you have. Palo Alto says that 99 percent of breaches come from misconfiguration. I have seen that first hand. I think the fewest alerts a customer had was around 100 still, but they used another tool for that, so that saves a lot.

I have been working with Prisma Cloud for about 15 months.

Prisma's stability is close to 100 percent because it's just a dashboard that connects to your public cloud. It's essentially a website that never goes down, and you could also host it locally if your security requires it. Most of the customers use the Prisma Cloud platform. If it goes down for any reason, the security agents work independently of Prisma Cloud. You send logs to Prisma Cloud and update the configurations via the cloud. However, if the platform goes offline, you still have top-notch security.

As long as you purchase credits, Prisma Cloud is easy to scale.

I have never contacted Palo Alto support because our team is highly proficient in the solution and the platform is easy to use. You deploy the agents, and it just works. 

It's straightforward to deploy the solution because it's cloud-based, so you just set up an account, username, and password. If you think about it, the Prisma Cloud tool does not do much, but what it does is valuable. It does something simple on a scale that human beings could not do. 

Based on my own experience, I would I rate Prisma Cloud a ten out of ten. However, I haven't compared it with other solutions, so maybe other solutions have more features that Prisma is lacking. My advice is to implement Prisma if it has the features you want but also shop around because I'm sure other solutions are just as good as this one.

We primarily use Prisma Cloud as a cloud security posture management (CSPM) module. Prisma Cloud is designed to catch vulnerabilities at the config level and capture everything on a cloud workload, so we mainly use it to identify any posture management issues that we are having in our cloud workloads. We also use it as an enterprise antivirus solution, so it's a kind of endpoint security solution.

Our setup is hybrid. We use SaaS also. We mostly work in AWS but we have customers who work with GCP and Azure as well. About 60 percent of our customers use AWS, 30 percent use Azure, and the remaining 10 percent are on GCP. Prisma Cloud covers the full scope. And for XDR, we have an info technology solution that we use for the Gulf cloud. So we have the EDF solution rolled out to approximately around 500 instances right now.  

Prisma Cloud is used heavily in our all production teams. Some might not be directly using the product since our team is the service owner and we manage Prisma. Our team has around 10 members teams, and they are the primary users. From an engineering aspect, there are another 10 team members who use it basically. Those are the actual people who work hands-on with Prisma Cloud. Aside from that, there are some product teams that use Prisma indirectly. If we detect something wrong with their products, we take care of it, but I don't think they have an active account on Prisma Cloud.

Prisma Cloud has been helpful from a security operations perspective. When a new product is getting onboarded or we are creating a new product — specifically when we need to create a new peripheral— it's inevitable that there will be a kind of vulnerability due to posture management. Everything we produce goes through via CICD, and it's kind of automated. Still, there are some scenarios where we see some gaps. So we can discover where those gaps exist, like if someone left an open port or an instance got compromised. 

These kinds of situations are really crucial for us,  and Prisma Cloud handles them really well. We know ahead of time if a particular posture is bad and we have several accounts in the same posture. Prisma gives us a deep dive with statistics and metrics, so we know which accounts are doing bad in terms of posture, how many accounts are out of alignment with the policy strategy, how many are not compliant. Also, it helps us identify who might be doing something shady. 

So we get some good functionality overall in that dashboard. Their dashboard is not customizable, however, so that's a feature we'd like to say. At the same time, what they do provide on their dashboard is pretty helpful. It enables us to make the posture management more mature. We're able to protect against or eliminate some potential incidents that could have happened if we didn't have Prisma. 

Prisma Cloud is quite simple to use. The web GUI is powerful. Prisma Cloud scans the overall architecture of the AWS network to identify open ports and other vulnerabilities, then highlights them. It's really good at managing compliance. We get out-of-the-box policies for SOC 2, Fedramp, and other compliance solutions, so we do not need to tune most of the rules because they are quite compliant, useful, and don't get too many false positives. 

And in terms of Prisma Cloud's XDR solution, we do not have anything at scope at present that can give us the same in-depth visibility on the endpoint level. So if something goes bad on the endpoint, Prisma's XDR solutions can really go deep down to identify which process is doing malicious activity, what was the network connection, how many times it has been opened, and who is using that kind of solution or that kind of process. So it's a long chain and its graphical representation is also very good. We feel like we have power in our hands. We have full visibility about what is happening on an endpoint level. 

When it comes to securing new SaaS applications, Prism Cloud is good. If I had to rate it, I would say seven out of 10. It gives us really good visibility. In the cloud, if you do not know what you are working with or you do not have full visibility, you cannot protect it. It's a good solution at least to cover CSPM. We have other tools also like Qualys that take care of the vulnerability management on the A-level staff — in the operating system working staff — but when it comes to the configuration level, Prisma is the best fit for us. 

Prisma Cloud's dashboards should be customizable. That's very important. Other similar solutions are more elastic so you have the power to create customized dashboards. In Prisma Cloud, you cannot do that. Prisma also should allow users to fully automate the workflow of an identified set. Right now, it can give us a hint about what has happened and there is an option to remediate that, but for some reason, that doesn't work. 

Another pain point is integration with ticketing solutions. We need bidirectional integration of Prisma Cloud and our ticketing tool. Currently, we only have one-way integration. When an alert appears in Prisma Cloud, it shows up in our ticketing tool as well. But if someone closes that ticket in our ticketing tool, that alert doesn't resolve in Prisma Cloud. We have to do it manually each time, which is a waste of time. 

 I am not sure how much Prisma Cloud protects against zero-day threats. Those kinds of threats really work in different kinds of patterns, like identify some kind of CBE, that kind of stuff. But considering the way it works for us, I don't think it'll be able to capture a zero-day threat if it is a vulnerability because Prisma Cloud actually doesn't capture vulnerability. It captures errors in posture management. That's a different thing. I don't know if there is any zero-day that Prisma can identify in AWS instantly. Probably, we can ask them to create a custom policy, but that generally takes time. We haven't seen that kind of scenario where we actually have to handle a zero-day threat with Prisma Cloud, because that gets covered mostly by Qualys.

I've been using Prisma Cloud for almost two years now.

Prisma Cloud is quite stable. At times, it goes down, but that's very rare. We have some tickets with them, but when we see some issues, they sort it out in no time. We do not have a lot of unplanned downtime. It happens rarely. So I think in the last year, we haven't seen anything like that.

Prisma Cloud is quite scalable. In our current licensing model, we're able to heavily extend our cloud workload and onboard a lot of customers. It really helps, and it is on par with other solutions.

I think Prisma Cloud's support is quite good. I would rate them seven out of 10 overall. They have changed their teams. The last team was comparatively not as good as the one we have right now. I would rate them five out of 10, but they have improved a lot. The new team is quite helpful. When we have an issue, they take care of it personally if we do not get an answer within the terms of the SLA. We tend to escalate to them and get a prompt answer. The relationship between our management and their team is quite good as well. .

We have a biweekly or weekly call with their tech support team. We are in constant communication about issues and operating problems with them. It's kind of a collab call with their tech support team, and we have, I think, a monthly call with them as well. So whenever we have issues, we have direct access to their support portal. We create tickets and discuss issues on the call weekly.

Transitioning to the new support team was relatively easy. They switched because of the internal structure and the way they work. Most of the engineering folks work out of Dublin and we are in India. The previous team was from the western time zone. That complicated things in terms of scheduling. So I think the current team is right now in Ireland and it's in the UK time zone. That works best for us. 

We have an engineering team that does the implementation for us, and our team specifically handles the operations once that product is set up for us. And then that product is handed over to us for the daily BA stuff accessing the security, the CSPM kind of module. We are not involved directly. When the product gets onboarded, it's handed over to us. We handle the management side, like if you need to create a new rule or you need to find teams for the rule. But the initial implementation is handled by our engineers.

I would rate Prisma Cloud six out 10. I would recommend it if you are using AWS or anything like that. It's quite a tool and I'm impressed with how they have been improving and onboarding new features in the past one and a half years. If you have the proper logging system and can implement it properly within your architecture, it can work really well.

If you are weighing Prisma Cloud versus some CASB solution, I would say that it depends on your use case. CASBs are a different kind of approach. When someone is already using a CASB solution, that's quite a mature setup while CSPM is another side of handling security. So if someone has CASB in place and feels they don't need CSPM, then that might be true for a particular use case at a particular point in time. But also we need to think of the current use case and the level of maturity at a given point in time and consider whether the security is enough.

I'm using the main module of Prisma Cloud, which manages security at scale in cloud environments.

Prisma Cloud offers a very interactive UI that lets you work more effectively, faster, and more efficiently. It can also be used as a dashboard for querying the cloud provider since it integrates with most of the APIs of the cloud service providers. It's a very unique tool in the sense that it lets you centralize the security control of all your cloud providers.

The first aspect that is important is the fact that Prisma Cloud is cloud-agnostic. It's actually available for the five top cloud providers: AWS, GCP, Azure, Oracle, and Alibaba Cloud. 

The second aspect is the fact that we can write our own rules to try to detect misconfigurations in those environments.

And Prisma Cloud is a single tool that protects cloud resources and applications without having to manage and reconcile disparate security and compliance reports. That's the main purpose of the CSPM module of Prisma Cloud: You can manage every cloud platform, every cloud account, from a single place, which is the Prisma Cloud dashboard. It gives you a very high overview of every asset, a full site inventory. And you can see the context as well as the severity of the errors that have been raised on each service and asset that has been deployed in the cloud.

In my experience, Prisma Cloud is a valuable asset for enterprises that tend to have a lot of cloud-native applications and that wish to secure, and take control of the security posture of these applications. One of the most important considerations is that Prisma Cloud is a product from Palo Alto Networks, a company that invests heavily in cyber security. There are a lot of features that have come out over time. In the beginning, Prisma Cloud was known for its CSPM capabilities, but today, Prisma Cloud is doing a lot of things that are very beneficial for cloud-native applications.

There are a couple of things that can be enhanced. The first is the coverage that Prisma offers. Today, there are hundreds of built-in policies for AWS and Azure, but GCP and Oracle are not covered as much as AWS. There is a lot of work to do on that part. There is, obviously, a tiny bit of favoritism towards AWS because it has the most market share. It's logical, but the other cloud providers are not as well covered as AWS.

The second issue is the alerting process. Today, it does monitor the resources—and I'm only speaking on the CSPM side of things. Prisma Cloud scans the environment and checks if there are misconfigurations, but it lacks context. There is a real lack when it comes to taking into consideration how the application was designed. For example, you can have an application that is deployed with an open S3 bucket, which is one of the most basic services in AWS. Prisma will tell you that there is a high-severity alert because, with that bucket, there is a possibility of having your data extracted. But sometimes, the data inside those buckets is actually public. So, the process lacks some intelligence.

I've been using Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks for 10 months.

I'm using the SaaS version which is running on Palo Alto's infrastructure, so I've never encountered instability. 

There is some patching behind Prisma Cloud when Palo Alto delivers new features so there are some "patch intervals," but most of the time, Palo Alto does notify you when something like that is coming up. It will say, "Hi. This Friday, the application will be unavailable from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM." But it is not very disturbing at all.

Because I'm using the SaaS version, there is no issue with scalability. It all depends on the credits and the amount of money that you have put into the tool. Aside from that, you can use it to onboard any cloud account no matter how many resources are in it.

I have contacted their tech support many times, and they are pretty quick. They are very invested and proficient. I get answers within a day or two, at most.

Sometimes, when an issue becomes pretty complicated, it can span a week because it is transferred to different people.

Positive

I did not use another solution before Palo Alto.

We have definitely seen ROI in that using Prisma Cloud is an eye-opener regarding cloud security. In general, Prisma Cloud helped us see a lot of blind spots that we left when designing applications. There were a lot of security misconfigurations that we wouldn't have been able to spot without Prisma. The return on value is in the securing of the applications that we are deploying, as well as through a better understanding of the types of issues in the type of environment.

The cost is run by credits. You can allocate them as you wish, so there are no issues there. I believe the credits, licensing, et cetera, are based on the size of the enterprise that is buying the product.

There are no additional costs beyond the standard fees.

Wiz was one of the tools we looked at. I was not the only one who made the choice, but we went with Prisma because of its capabilities as well as the support. We are investing a lot in Palo Alto Networks, meaning we use a lot of their products, so we know the enterprise itself. We know the quality of their catalog of services.

My advice is to take your time before going the CSPM route. Look at your environments and inventory everything in it. There is, obviously, no shadow IT in the cloud. It's very easy to get an inventory of the resources you are running on. Get an overview and see if having a powerful CSPM at your side is really a need. There are a lot of open-source solutions that can do the job for smaller environments.

From what I understand, Palo Alto is trying to push Prisma Cloud to become more than a simple CSP tool, since it offers the ability to cover the global environment of cloud applications, such as doing scanning and infrastructure-as-code, and managing IAM, rather than doing it directly in the cloud provider. They are trying to centralize things.

It can also be used to manage containerized applications. It can do runtime security in container-based managed services of cloud providers, such as EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Service) which is a service managed by AWS. You can rely on Prisma to put an agent in such environments to monitor and supervise the security. You can also use it to scan the container images that are stored in repositories, whether they are on-premises or in the cloud. I've heard that Palo Alto is doing a lot of things like this, but as of today, I'm only using the CSPM part.

And in terms of security automation capabilities, I've used Checkov, which is the tool they are using for scanning specialized code like Terraform. In its origins, Checkov is an open-source tool and I've been using it with my clients by deploying it in CI/CD chains to scan, automatically, the code that is pushed inside repos and deployed in the cloud. But I have never used the Chekhov that is built into Prisma Cloud.

Similarly, I know Prisma offers the possibility of auto-remediation, but I have not enabled this option. It could be a bit dangerous because there is the context and a lot of things to take into consideration before blocking something, before deployment or after deployment. So, I have not used its preventive actions.

The solution provides visibility into complex or distributed cloud environments, but I can think of a couple of scenarios where clients might not think the same. It supports the top five clouds, but if you are using another cloud provider, you won't be able to use Prisma Cloud for that instance. You would be able to use the Compute module, but it would be very hard to use the CSPM capabilities on such a cloud provider since their APIs are not working with Prisma. But if you are using the most commonly used clouds, Prisma Cloud is a very valuable asset.

Prisma Cloud is a very powerful tool and it can be used in various scenarios, but it doesn't cover everything. You might choose a cloud provider that is not supported or prioritized by Prisma. If you are using Oracle Cloud or Alibaba, you might want to get another solution, maybe one that comes with better policies and a better investment in those technologies.

Aside from that, Prisma Cloud is a good solution if you are using a mainstream cloud provider. Prisma Cloud can help enhance your security posture. Because it's a Palo Alto product, you can be sure that there is a lot of maintenance behind it. The product will be able to keep up with the market. They will keep the features coming and it will continue to be a better product over time.