Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Reviews

The solution is integrated with cloud environments such as Azure, Alibaba, and Oracle. After integrating, we do check the network logs, including what are the config logs or configuration issues clients are facing. We see what their cloud requirements are. There are email use cases specific to the modules, and we do have visibility over the entire cloud environment. We handle vulnerability management and can block according to the rules and policies. 

We can manage identities as well, right down to a particular machine. 

We've been able to solve various problems. It's helped with cloud security. It problem solves for threat detection and compliance. 

It's helped clients with cloud security. When it comes to the financial aspect, we have clear visibility into what is going on, and we have a clear idea of how we can inspect and prevent issues. 

It offers full visibility.

There is auto-remediation capability with this solution. 

It offers threat detection across multi-cloud environments. Many clients are using hybrid setups and different clouds in India. When it integrates, it's helpful in gaining visibility across the entire environment.

It is comprehensive. It's very easy to define rules and auto-remediation. It's basically one click. It's great for protecting the full cloud-native stack. 

The security automation capabilities are very good. It's played an important role with auto-remediation, which is important to the automation process. We can decide how we want to respond as well. We can arrange logs and alerts. All of this can be automated. 

It allows us to take a preventative approach to security. When I started with Prisma, we had sessions about how we could work with the capabilities. We have a lot of features in Prisma Cloud. The UI has improved and helped us gather information about vulnerabilities and compliance issues.

The build, deploy, and run lifecycle is good. We have particular pipelines, and we have out-of-the-box policies defined. We can see what is going on. We can move faster within the environment with it. 

It provides complete microservices that we can check on a micro level. The solution provides visibility and control regardless of how complex or distributed our cloud environments become.

The solution enabled us to enter our CI/CD pipeline and touchpoints into existing processes. It provides us with a good backbone. 

We are provided with a single tool to protect all of our cloud resources and applications without having to manage and reconcile compliance reports. It can fetch the reports for us. We have APIs and pretty refined plugins to get the reports. We can get it all from the console. We can also schedule reporting. The third-party integrations are very helpful.

The runtime policy is very helpful. We can define runtime rules and go through alerts or blockages. It's one of the best parts of the solution. It's reduced the number of alerts, sometimes by 80% to 90%, depending on the situation.

With the amount of visibility we get, we've been able to reduce alert investigation times. We can investigate if we need to, or we can make custom answers to specific alerts. Depending on your level of expertise in the tool, it barely takes any time at all. If you understand the case, if you already know the type of answer, you can put it in. With Prisma, we've been able to reduce investigation times by 80%.

While, as a cloud security engineer, I can't say how much money it saves, I can see the credit, and it looks like less money is spent.

When there are updates, whether daily, weekly, or monthly, it needs configuration or permission adjustments. There is no automation for that, which is too bad. 

I've been using the solution for two years. 

This is a very stable product. 

Prisma users are increasing day by day. We have a team of around 12 people using the solution. We have a variety of clients coming onto Prisma, and we work to help them become more compliant using the solution. 

It's very scalable and very easy to use. 

We used technical support during deployment, and they were very good. Technical support is awesome. 

Positive

I haven't really worked with other tools. I started with Prisma Cloud.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. We had good support to help with learning and the capabilities of the solution. 

The training took two to three weeks. The deployment would take around two to three days. 

There isn't too much maintenance. There are updates. There's nothing other than that. 

Prisma's support helped with the deployment. 

We are a Palo Alto partner.

After using the solution for about two years, I would rate it nine out of ten so far. 

We use Palo Alto to secure our network.  We are using the PA-820 firewall and all of the Prisma Cloud modules. It helps reduce our vulnerability to hacking and any malicious attacks on the network. With that appliance, we can minimize those things and control what goes in and out 

We have reduced network calls by 80 percent. The benefit of Palo Alto is the ability to create security across multiple levels and protect against hacks and vulnerabilities. You start to see these benefits within one or two days after implementing these devices. 

We are also using a honeypot to detect a target on our site. Once we have the target, we are blacklisting those using the firewall. The solution has reduced our investigation times by about 50 to 75 percent. It minimizes the alerts, so we're seeing fewer.

I like Palo Alto's threat protection and Wi-Fi coverage. It has advanced features like DNS security and sandboxing. The automation capabilities are excellent.

The UI could be improved.

I have been using Palo Alto for almost eight months.

Palo Alto provides good support and doesn't take long to resolve an issue. 

We previously used Cisco ASA. We decided to switch because we wanted to adopt a UTM approach in which all the logs and reports go to a single dashboard. Everything is visible in Panorama, which comes with the Palo Alto appliances. We need to purchase a separate license for Panorama, but it's there. 

There are many competitors, such as FortGate, but Palo Alto is better. FortiGate has some advantages in terms of throughput. You can get better throughput if you enable all the engines in parallel. However, I've heard about Fortinet devices being compromised, but I've never heard of that happening with Palo Alto. 

I rate Palo Alto Prisma Cloud nine out of 10. Everything is neat, clean, and easy to use. However, when you commit changes through the UI, it takes some time to load on every system. 

We use this solution to detect misconfigurations in the cloud. It's a multi-cloud solution, so if you're running a multi-cloud environment like Azure, AWS, and GCP, you only need to deploy a single solution. It assists with improving the security posture of an organization.

I use CSPM and CWPP. The previous organization I worked for used both, but the company I work for now only uses CSPM. I've also worked with code security.

We recently acquired this solution, so it has slowly started gaining momentum in my organization.

This solution provides us with a single tool to protect all of our cloud resources and applications without having to manage and reconcile different security and compliance reports. It's a single solution for everything in a multi-cloud environment.

It enhances operations, but it's a pretty measurable tool. It provides comprehensive visibility.

It provides risk clarity at runtime across the entire pipeline and shows issues as they are discovered during the build phases. 

The modules in CSPM and CWPP are visibility, compliance governance, threat detection, data security, host security, container security, serverless security, web application, and API security. This is an additional cost, so I don't think any organization uses all of the modules.

I previously worked for a health organization that was using this solution. They were able to get certified in HITRUST using this product.

Our developers are able to correct issues using the tools they use to code.

The CSPM and CWPP functionalities are pretty good. It depends on what kind of data you have in your cloud, your workload, and some other factors. If you're doing a lot of containers, you need CWPP models. If you just do regular cloud contributions, then you can use CSPM.

It provides security spanning multi and hybrid-cloud environments. My current organization's goal is to migrate to the cloud eventually. If that's your organization's goal, you need to have some kind of security mechanism or protection in place to make sure that the resources you're building in the cloud are built for the best security practices and are free of misconfiguration vulnerabilities. 

When we deploy containers in any cloud, the runtime protection is really good. If a container is running any kind of application, it can detect a cryptomining attack. The solution also provides File Integrity Monitoring testing.

It has various models and provides comprehensive visibility. It shows us how our assets are performing in any of our clouds. It gives us a holistic view of our native cloud environment, and we can also fine-tune the policies for our architecture.

The modules help us take a preventative approach to cloud security. Flow Logs provide a real-time assessment of our network.

It recently integrated with another company called Checkov. It checks all the misconfigurations that a developer could make during the build phase. This means that whenever we're building any kind of application or deploying any application, it will detect it right away. We can integrate it into our CI/CD pipeline or with any other Jenkins plugins. I tested those use cases as well. The solution has improved since they integrated the product with Checkov.

It provides good visibility. In terms of controls, it depends on how you want to do it. Sometimes, you need to be specific in terms of controls. With runtime detection, it's going to be more powerful. We're confident that our assets are secure.

The solution is capable of integrating security into our CI/CD pipeline and adding touch points into existing DevOps processes. We don't have the option to leverage it, but I have tested it in my previous organization.

This solution is more AWS and Azure-centric. It needs to be more specific on the GCP side, which they are working on.

I have been using this solution for about two and a half years.

The solution is reliable.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is very helpful. I would rate them a nine out of ten. We have a weekly cadence.

Positive

The setup was very easy and straightforward. We haven't set up the automation perspective. We're still testing it, so we haven't leveraged it yet.

The setup didn't take very long, but it will be different for every organization. If your cloud architect team is willing to deploy with you, it shouldn't take more than a week. It also depends on how large the organization is and how many subscriptions are in the cloud environment.

We don't need to maintain anything on the console side.

We used an integrator from Palo Alto. They were very good and offered great support.

The solution is pretty expensive. It all depends on the organization's goals and needs.

The cost depends on the pricing model. Compared to other solutions, the cost isn't that bad.

I compared the solution to other security products like Fortinet, Lacework, and Security Command Center.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

Those who want to use this solution, need to understand the concept behind this product and get to know their own environment first. The solution will give you holistic visibility of your assets, which will show you what needs to be fixed. Security comes with an expense, so it depends on what you want to leverage and where.

I'm still testing the automation capabilities because my organization is specific to one cloud. They were more aggressive on Azure and AWS Prisma Cloud, but now they are considering GCP customers as well.

We're still in POC mode for continuous security that comes under runtime protection. I can't 100% guarantee that it reduces runtime alerts.

My company provides solutions for Cisco customers and helps them secure their cloud environments. Most of our clients are adapting to the cloud, and we're trying to resolve vulnerabilities in their configurations. I use all of the Prisma Cloud modules but have expertise in the CSPM and CWP modules. We work with SMEs but also have some enterprise clients. 

Using Prisma Cloud has improved customer satisfaction. Our customers are happy with the solution and the level of security we can provide with this. Prisma can secure a cloud-native development cycle. We can configure Prisma to run a scan before we build the images. 

Prisma is known for its visibility and comprehensiveness. It provides insight into our entire inventory of assets and everything happening in our multi-cloud or hybrid environments. We want to know all the services working in our environment and who is accessing them. 

It provides a single tool for protecting all cloud resources without the need to reconcile compliance reports. All of our reports come into Prisma's CSPM module via the APIs. It's easy to get the reports coming into CSPM. We can get the inventory, asset, and alert reports containing all of the alert notifications coming into the CWPP and the reliability and compliance. It has enhanced our overall reporting experience. We can do a deep dive into alerts from various integrated third-party applications and get alerts sent via email or SMS text to keep track of any incidents in our environment.

My favorite feature is the CWPP module. We can define various kinds of rules for vulnerabilities, incidents, or suspicious activities. Prisma Cloud covers various cloud providers, including AWS and GCP. It covers every cloud on the market. 

Many customers in finance, healthcare, and other industries are adopting cloud or hybrid environments. Some of them are using GCP, AWS, and Azure services together, and Prisma is compatible with all of them.

Prisma's ability to protect a fully cloud-native stack is comprehensive. We benefit from Palo Alto's technical knowledge, training sessions, and learning programs to develop robust solutions for our customers. Prisma's automation features are helpful. We can set up automated remediation, messaging, and alerts. The CSPM module can be automated directly, and we can automate runtime rules in the CWP module. We can also automate some code scanning. 

Prisma is integrated into our CI/CD pipeline through the CWP module. We can load the images into Azure DevOps and scan them for vulnerabilities or compliance issues. We can block the vulnerabilities or disable the application so it cannot run with the vulnerabilities in place. 

Runtime alerts are among the best capabilities. In CWP, we have to block malicious or suspicious activities to stop the incoming attacks against our workloads. Using various templates, we can reduce our runtime alerts by 60 to 70 percent. 

I have some challenges customizing and personalizing some of the capabilities in the CSPM in terms of new policies and services. We have to reconfigure and rebuild the CSPM.

I have used Prisma Cloud for around three years. 

I rate Prisma Cloud nine out of 10 for stability. 

I rate Prisma Cloud nine out of 10 for scalability.

I rate Palo Alto support 10 out of 10. They come and help us a lot. 

Positive

Deploying Prisma Cloud is straightforward. We received some training from Palo Alto's technical team. The deployment time varies depending on the client and the modules you deploy. It may take a few weeks or a couple of months. After deployment, Palo Alto handles the maintenance. They notify us by text or email when there will be a scheduled maintenance window. 

I'm not involved on the financial side, but I know that Prisma Cloud isn't cheap. 

I've seen some other solutions with CSPM and CWP capabilities, but they do not have the same coverage of multi-cloud or hybrid environments. That's an area where Prisma stands out from its competitors. 

I rate Prisma Cloud 10 out of 10. 

It's a service that we have acquired for our cybersecurity department. We deployed Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto in all our clouds, which are Amazon, Azure, and Alibaba.

We are doing cloud security compliance as a security posture, and we are also doing workflow protection.

The solution gives us a lot of visibility across all of our cloud solutions. It helps with the security posture across all of our clouds. 

The security posture and workflow protection are excellent.

From the initial POC, compared to what we had witnessed with Check Point, it's easier to use.

Prisma Cloud is quite a good solution. However, the price is not good. 

We'd like to have more native integration with clouds and additional security checks in the future. It will be nice to see a general evolution of the solution. 

I've been using the solution for about one year.

The stability has been good so far after less than a year of use.

We are early in the process in terms of using the solution. We're not expecting to scale in the next few years. The problem there will be the licensing costs.

Right now, the environment we use is quite big already. We have several clouds already and need the visibility the solution provides. 

Our consultants deal with technical support. I do not deal with support directly. 

We did not previously use a different solution. We wanted our partner to validate our security with a tool from time to time. However, it was a service they were providing to us.

My team was involved in the deployment. I was not directly involved. It was straightforward with the help of our consultants.

Our consulting partner helped us with the initial deployment. 

We witnessed an ROI. It helped reduce risks and sped up threat detection. We avoided human mistakes as well while using this solution. 

We noted the value almost immediately once it was deployed. 

The price is high. In the future, when there are more competitors at the same level with different clouds, maybe the position will be different. 

We evaluated Check Point due to the relationship we have with them. Yet, they did not completely support Alibaba. Alibaba was only compatible with Check Point and Prisma. However, Check Point was at a very early stage and not quite as developed. 

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use Prisma Cloud for the banking sector to check the policies as required.

Prisma Cloud provides security scanning in multi and hybrid cloud environments. This is important because customers often ask if they need certain services, such as detection, auto-remediation, and policies. AWS has all of these features, but why would a customer use anything else? The answer is that Prisma Cloud is multi-cloud, so it can monitor multiple clouds as well as on-premise networks. This is often a key requirement for customers.

Prisma Cloud can help us take a preventative approach to cloud security. It is built for developers and provides a range of features, including RQL, multi-cloud support, and endpoint detection.

Prisma Cloud provides the visibility and control we need. It properly manages all cloud assets and provides information about assets in our cloud.

Prisma Cloud provides us with a single tool to protect all our cloud resources and applications, eliminating the need to manage and reconcile disparate security and compliance reports.

Prisma Cloud provides risk clarity at runtime and throughout the entire pipeline. It also shows issues as they are discovered during the build phases.

The developers are able to correct issues using the tools they used to code.

The alert investigation time has been reduced by half an hour.

Prisma Cloud's most important feature is its auto-remediation. This feature automatically fixes security vulnerabilities in our cloud or on-premises environment. This can help us to improve our security posture and reduce our risk of a security breach.

Prisma Cloud lags behind in terms of security automation capabilities. Specifically, the investigation feature is not fully automated and requires users to know the RQL language. This can be a barrier for new users.

Prisma Cloud is not updating the real-time information on the UI for our cloud assets. It takes approximately two to three hours for the information to be updated.

I would like Palo Alto to provide a three-month free trial for Prisma Cloud.

The stability has room for improvement.

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

Prisma Cloud is not stable except for our AWS clients.

Prisma Cloud is scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment can take anywhere from two days to 15 days. We deploy based on the customer's requirements. 

We implement the solution for our clients.

Prisma Cloud is more expensive than Check Point CloudGuard.

I give Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks an eight out of ten.

Based on an organization's basic requirements for auditing and detection, I would recommend Prisma Cloud.

The best thing I have learned about Prisma Cloud is that it is a single platform, like SIEM. This is beneficial for network engineers because it reduces the complexity of finding the cause of an issue. With Prisma Cloud, everything can be found in one place.

We were implementing and expanding a system that we had internally. We were creating a system called Midas, which was about keeping data safe. It was cloud-based. We wanted to keep data safe and provide an analytics environment on the cloud.

We now have a service offering that secures data and allows large volumes of data to be secured and exposed within a tight and well-founded community.

It helped to reduce downtime in our organization.

Its ease of integration is valuable because we need to get the solution out of the door quickly, so speed and ease matter.

The area for improvement is less about the product and more about the upsell. If we've already agreed that we'd like your product x, y, or z, don't try to add fries to my burger. I don't need it.

The firm has been using it for about two years. My direct interaction with it was about a year ago.

I didn't notice any kind of instability, but there are foibles and little nuances.

We are happy with it overall. I'd rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

We had a number of different solutions and still do.

It was in-between in terms of complexity. We leveraged our Palo Alto friends to help us get over the humps, and they did a great job.

We didn't take help from any third party. Palo Alto implemented it.

We have not seen an ROI in this case, but we didn't buy it for a return on investment.

We evaluated multiple solutions. They have a well-known product line in the industry, and we stopped and talked with them and picked them because of their capabilities and competencies.

In terms of providing a unified platform that natively integrates all security capabilities, I'm not expert enough to say that it supplies everything, but it's well-known. There are a number of different features and capabilities in their suite.

To a colleague at another company who says, “We are just looking for the cheapest and fastest firewall," I would say that it's never the cheapest and the fastest. You always need to lay down what your needs are and then go after who has the right level of capabilities, competencies, and price point.

Palo Alto embeds machine learning in the core of the firewall to provide inline, real-time attack prevention. Every vendor needs to be considering how they're going to appropriately integrate both generative AI and machine learning. As we move forward, it's going to be table stakes.

In terms of the value I receive from attending an RSA Conference, I have two hats. I'm working for an organization. It's federally funded research and development. Attending an RSA Conference helps me keep a finger on the pulse of that, but I also am a security blogger, so I make sure that I'm keeping up to date. Talking to people is another important part of this conference. The one thing that's missing from the conference is that there's so much focus on reaction instead of protection up front and thinking about things up front, but it's a very valuable conference overall. 

Overall, I'd rate them an eight out of ten. They are well known in this field, and they do have good products that are niche to what they're doing.

When we started using this tool, the name was Twistlock, it was not Prisma Cloud. We had a container team responsible for modernizing our environment and they created an on-prem solution using Red Hat OpenShift. They started using Twistlock as a way to manage the security of this on-prem environment.

My team, which was the security team, inherited the ownership of the tool to manage all the security problems that it was raising.

When we started using containers on the cloud, our cloud provider was Azure. We also started migrating our security solutions for the cloud, but that was at the end of my time with the company, so I didn't participate much in this cloud process.

We were also sending the logs and alerts to Splunk Cloud. We were managing all the alerts generated by policies and vulnerabilities and the threats from the web. That way, we had a pipeline system sending these alerts to a central location where our investigation team would look at them. So we used the system to manage both cloud and on-prem and connect them.

We had one team that didn't have any security whatsoever. We helped them to add Prisma Cloud to scan their environment. It was a big issue in the company at the time, because they had a huge environment which was not following the security rules of the company. They didn't have any security. Prisma Cloud helped us to start raising alerts and vulnerabilities. That was a successful case because in the timeframe of one to two weeks, we installed the tool and were teaching the team how to manage it, find their vulnerabilities, and how to fix them. We were able to help a team that was totally vulnerable to have a security solution.

Overall, it covered all the stages that we hoped it would cover.

The solution also reduced our runtime alerts. I don't have the exact numbers but I would say it lowered the number of issues by 70 percent. Our strategy was that we started using the tool for some small applications, and then we started using it for other teams. For the small applications, I can't guarantee the reduction was 70 percent because those solutions were managed by the security team which had smart people who were security conscious.

We used the policy features to manage users so that they would not have secrets in their containers. We also used the vulnerabilities, the CVEs, that were being raised by the tool.

The CVEs are valuable because we used to have a tool to scan CVEs, at the language level, for the dependencies that our developers had. What is good about Prisma Cloud is that the CVEs are not only from the software layer, but from all layers: the language, the base image, and you also have CVEs from the host. It covers the full base of security.

The compliance is good because it has a deep view of the container. It can find stuff that only administrators would have access to in our container. It can go deep down into the container and find those policy issues.

We also started looking for the WaaS (Web-Application and API Security) solution, but we didn't implement it during the time I was at the company. We tested it. What's good about the WaaS is that it's almost a miracle feature. You can find SQL injection or cross-site scripting and defend against that by setting up Prisma Cloud and turning on the feature.

Prisma Cloud also provided risk clarity at runtime and across the entire pipeline, showing issues as they were discovered during the build phases. It provided a good rating for how to prioritize a threat, but we also had a way to measure risk in our company that was a little bit different. This was the same with other scanning tools that we had: the risk rating was something that we didn't focus too much on because we had our own way to rate risk. Prisma Cloud's rating was helpful sometimes, but we used our risk measurement more than the tool's.

One problem was identifying Azure Kubernetes Services. We had many teams creating Kubernetes systems without any security whatsoever. It was hard for us to identify Kubernetes because the Prisma Cloud could not identify them. From what I heard from Palo Alto at the time, they were building a new feature to identify those. It was an issue they were already trying to fix.

In addition, when it comes to access for developers, I would like to have more granular settings. For example, in our company we didn't want to display hosts' vulnerabilities to developers, because the infrastructure or containers team was responsible for host vulnerabilities or the containers. The developers were only responsible for the top application layer. We didn't want to provide that data to the developers because A) we thought it was sensitive data and B) because it was data that didn't belong to developers. We didn't want to share it, but I remember having this problem when it came to the granularity of granting permissions. 

They need to make the settings more flexible to fit our internal policies about data. We didn't want developers to see some data, but we wanted them to have access to the console because it was going to help them. One possibility was to develop our own solution for this, using the API. But that would add complexity. The console was clean and beautiful. It has the radar where you can see all the containers. But we just didn't want to show some data. It was a pain to have to set up the access to some languages and some data.

Another thing that was a pain was that in our on-prem environment there was a tool that sometimes generated a temporary container, to be used just for a build, and Prisma would raise some compliance issues for this container that would die shortly. It was hard to suppress these kinds of alerts because it was hard to find a standard or a rule that would fit this scenario. The tool was able manage the whole CI/CD pipeline, including the build as well—even these containers that were temporary for a build—but sometimes it would raise too much unnecessary data.

Also, one of the things that it's hard to understand sometimes is how to fix an issue. We managed to do so by testing things ourselves because we are developers. But a little bit of explanation about how to fix something would help. It was more showing what the problem was than it did about how to fix it.

I used Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks for about a year and a half.

It's pretty much stable, as much as containers are stable. It is more about the container solution itself, or how Kubernetes is managed and the state of health of the containers. As Prisma is a container solution itself, it was as good as the Kubernetes environment could make it. 

I don't know about the Prisma Cloud SaaS solution because we didn't use it, but the on-prem solution was as reliable as our Kubernetes system was. It was really reliable.

It's pretty scalable because of the API. I liked how simple the console was and how simple the API was. There was no complexity; it was straightforward. The API documentation was also very good so it was pretty easy to scale. You could automate pretty much everything. You could automate the certificate information, you could automate the access for developers, and a lot of other stuff. It was a pretty modern solution. Using APIs and containers, it was pretty scalable.

We used their technical support many times and it was very good. The engineers there helped us a lot. They were engaged and interested in helping, and they were polite and they were fast. When we raised an issue to high priority, they answered faster. I would rate their support at five out of five.

Prisma Cloud was the only solution we had for container security. We had other tools such as SAST and DAST tools, as well as open source management tools. Those intersected somewhat with what Prisma does, but Prisma had access to the whole environment, so it's a little bit different.

We used the API from Prisma Cloud. We had a Jenkins pipeline with a lot of scripts to automate the installation of Prisma Cloud and the patching updates as well.

In our company, the security team had about 10 people, but only two were responsible for Prisma Cloud. As I mentioned, we inherited ownership of it from the containers team. In the containers team, we had a guy who was our main contact and who helped us. For example, when we needed to access a certain environment, he had to manage access so that it could have privileged access to do what it needed to do in the container environment. So overall, there were three people involved with it.

We used Prisma Cloud extensively. We used it across the whole on-prem environment and partially on cloud. We were at around 10 or 20 percent of the cloud. I think that nowadays they have probably reached much more than that, because we were just beginning on the cloud at the time.

Smaller companies should probably use the SaaS. I know that Azure and the cloud providers already have different ways to use tools in an easy manner so that you don't need to manage the infrastructure. So smaller companies should look into that. The infrastructure solution would be more for big companies, but I would recommend the solution for big companies. I would also recommend it for small companies. In terms of budget, sometimes it's hard to prioritize what's more important, but Prisma fits into different budget levels, so even if you have a small environment you can use Prisma's SaaS solution.

I was pretty satisfied with it. My impression of Prisma Cloud was pretty good. It's an amazing tool. It gives the whole view of your container environment and connection with multiple platforms, such as Splunk. It is a good solution. If I had my own company and a container environment, I would use it. It can fit a huge container environment with a lot of hosts, but it can also fit a small container environment. Azure also provides built-in solutions to install Prisma in your application. So there are different solutions for various container environments. The company I was in had huge container environments to monitor, on-prem and in the cloud, and the tool fit really well. But the tool also fits small environments.