Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
2018-12-05T07:52:00Z
Julia Frohwein - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director of Delivery at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
  • 0
  • 9

What advice do you have for others considering Palo Alto Networks VM-Series?

If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, what would you say?

How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?

26
PeerSpot user
26 Answers
JH
Director of IT at Tavoca Inc
Real User
Top 20
2022-07-30T18:08:00Z
30 July 22

We have not yet implemented the DNS security features. However, we will likely be doing so next year. If one of my colleagues at another company were to say that they were just looking for the cheapest and fastest firewall, I would suggest that they be careful. Palo Alto has a great balance. It's not super expensive compared to other options on the market, and it's quite quick when it comes to throughput and performance. In summary, this is a good product but I do suggest that people shop around a little bit. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

JR
Manager, Information Technology at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2022-05-02T05:27:00Z
02 May 22

We are happy with their features for how we are using it and what we have deployed. I would recommend giving the solution a try and see the difference between it and your existing firewalls. Give it a shot and see the difference. In the firewall market, it is the number one product right now. I would rate it as 10 out of 10.

Shrijendra Shakya - PeerSpot reviewer
C.T.O at Sastra Network Solution Inc. Pvt. Ltd.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
2021-11-09T23:39:00Z
09 November 21

We have not yet used Panorama for centralized management but in the future, we may do so for other projects. My advice for anybody who is looking into purchasing a firewall is to carefully consider what their requirements are. I have seen that when a customer procures a firewall, they initially choose products like Sophos. Over time, they engage in trials with the majority of the vendors and finally end up with Palo Alto. This is only after spending a lot of time and money on other products. If instead, a client is aware of the requirements including how much traffic there is and what throughput is needed, it's better to invest in Palo Alto than to try all of the cheaper alternatives. Then, evaluate everything afterward and finally select Palo Alto. This, of course, is providing the client doesn't have limitations on the investment that they're going to make. I say this because generally, in my practice, what I've seen is that when choosing a firewall, the clients first choose a cheaper alternative. Then, after some time they think that it may not be what they wanted. This could be brought about by a throughput issue or maybe some threats were not blocked or they have had some security incidents. After trying these firewalls, they replace them with another, and yet another, until finally, they settle on Palo Alto. Essentially, my advice is to skip the cheaper vendors and go straight to Palo Alto. In summary, this is a very good product and my only real complaint is about the cost. If it were more competitive then more customers would choose it, and those people suffering losses as a result of security incidents would be saved. I find the real reason that people don't choose the right product is due to the cost factor. Even when they know that the product is the best choice, because of the limitation that they have on the investment they can make, they're not able to choose it. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Darshil Sanghvi - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Reseller
Top 5Leaderboard
2021-05-19T12:03:00Z
19 May 21

We deploy the solution on-premises for customers and organizations, although we also do so via AWS. There are around 16 users connected to the VMP firewall. The security feature is really good, although there would be a bit of a learning curve when it comes to the cloud. I rate Palo Alto Networks VM-Series as a nine out of ten.

Ricardo S. - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Infrastructure Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
2021-01-23T04:01:00Z
23 January 21

Good support from the brand and local partner in Chile.

Alexandru Sireteanu - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Professor at Facultatea de Economie și Administrarea Afacerilor din Iași
Real User
Top 20
2021-01-05T17:34:14Z
05 January 21

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Palo Alto Networks VM-Series a nine.

Learn what your peers think about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
633,572 professionals have used our research since 2012.
RS
Network Security Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
2020-12-11T17:29:37Z
11 December 20

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

GA
Senior Network Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
2020-10-13T07:21:29Z
13 October 20

I don't have too many complaints as I compare the virtualized version to the physical one. Perhaps I haven't noticed any issues because we use the proper hardware, and it was strong enough to carry the workload and remain quite responsive. My advice for anybody who is implementing the VM-Series is to be very well prepared and test it in advance. Make sure to scope it and understand the performance implications. Also, be sure that the core features are understood and are supported on the VM. Then, test it before implementation or migration. This is a very good product but I can't rate it as perfect because there are these little issues that are pretty common and you expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. I think there was also some limitation on how you can do the high availability on virtualized power, in Azure in particular. If these common features were consistently working on both physical and virtual deployments then I would probably rate it a ten out of ten. As it is now, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

GA
Senior Network Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
2020-10-07T07:04:33Z
07 October 20

I would advise getting very well prepared by defining the scope and testing it in advance. Make sure that you understand the performance implications and that the core features are supported on the VM, and they are tested before the implementation or migration. I would rate Palo Alto Networks VM-Series a nine out of ten.

TD
Security Operations Specialist at a logistics company with 201-500 employees
Real User
2020-10-01T09:57:59Z
01 October 20

I would definitely recommend this solution. It comes under the top industry leaders and is comparable to other top products in this category. I would rate Palo Alto Networks VM-Series a nine out of ten.

KS
Senior Network Architect at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2020-10-01T09:57:00Z
01 October 20

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

JL
Executive Cyber Security Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Consultant
2020-09-21T06:33:11Z
21 September 20

My first lesson when it comes to advice is a rule that I follow. When a new version comes out, we wait a month. If in that month we are not seeing any major complaints or issues with the Palo Alto firewall customer base, then we consider it safe. The client base is usually a pretty good barometer for announcing to the world that Palo Alto upgrades are not ready. When that happens, making the upgrade goes off our list until we hear better news. If we do not see any of those bad experiences, then we do the upgrade. That is the way we treat major revisions. It usually takes about a month, or a month-and-a-half before we commit. Minor revisions, we apply within two weeks. I am of the opinion right now that there are some features missing on Palo Alto that may or may not be important to particular organizations. What they have is what you have to look at. Sit down and be sure it is the right solution for what you need to do. I mean, if the organization is a PCI (Payment Card Industry) type service — in other words, they need to follow PCI regulations — Palo Alto works great. It is solid, and you do not have remote users. If you are a Department of Defense type organization, then there are some really strong arguments to look elsewhere. That is one of the few times where Cisco is kind of strong choice and I could make an argument for using them as a solution. That is really bad for me to say because I do not like Cisco firewalls. On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the Palo Alto Networks VM-series as an eight-out-of-ten.

NK
Senior Manager Network Engineering at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2020-09-10T07:35:40Z
10 September 20

This is definitely a product that I can recommend. Overall, it is a good product, although it would be better if they offered a cloud proxy. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Md Rezwan Ashique - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Specialist at Accretive Technologies Pvt Ltd
Real User
2020-07-15T07:11:39Z
15 July 20

We're partners with Palo Alto. We're using the latest version of the solution. We have a VM-Series via Palo Alto and K2K and the hardware Series. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

VG
IT Security Head with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-04-16T08:44:43Z
16 April 20

I highly recommend this service compared to other vendors. It has everything included in one platform including IPS, IDS, and antivirus. By using the Palo Alto initial configuration, it is going to block many threats from day one and it is pretty easy to do. You don't have to have an in-house technical team that is capable of doing that. You don't require that kind of knowledge, which is important because many people don't understand IDS, IPS, or file blocking. They need experience. With Palo Alto, a normal person with perhaps a year of technical experience will understand how to configure the firewall and generate reports. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Kofi Otchere - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Infrastructure Specialist (E-Transform Project) at Ministry of Communications and Information
Real User
2020-04-13T06:27:32Z
13 April 20

I have been using Palo Alto since version 6.0, and I am currently evaluating the latest one, version 9.1. My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to try the trial version first. It is good for 30 days and it can actually be used because it is the full product. You can test all of the scenarios and try the next-generation features. You can use features like the VPN GlobalProtect and actually see it work. The same with URL filtering and antivirus. Overall, this is a great next-generation firewall. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Sarith Sasidharan - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at a government with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5
2020-04-08T06:36:56Z
08 April 20

Everything from Palo Alto is good and I recommend that people implement this firewall. I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Shrijendra Shakya - PeerSpot reviewer
C.T.O at Sastra Network Solution Inc. Pvt. Ltd.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
2020-04-05T09:13:00Z
05 April 20

It is one of the best solutions as far as firewalls go. I would rate Palo Alto as a nine out of ten. In the next release, I would like for them to develop an anti-malware functionality in which it checks for malicious files like Cisco has.

PeerSpot user
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Solution Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Consultant
2019-01-14T13:16:00Z
14 January 19

It solves several challenges protecting your AWS workloads with good security features, delivering superior visibility, control, and threat prevention at the application level when compared to other cloud-oriented security solutions. I have not tried integrating Palo Alto with other products.

Michael Robtoy - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Team Lead at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
2019-01-14T13:16:00Z
14 January 19

It is a good product, but there is room for improvement. We use this with Microsoft AD, N2WS, IIS, MySQL, MS SQL, and a number of proprietary applications.

AP
Director at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2018-12-11T08:31:00Z
11 December 18

They are the leading next-generation firewall. I would recommend deploying a next-generation firewall. I am using the on-premise and AWS version. They are exactly the same.

Sachin Sheth - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Cloud Security at Wipro Technologies
Reseller
2018-12-11T08:31:00Z
11 December 18

Identify a use case first of all. If the use case is a match, then use the product. We use it in the cloud for both AWS and non-AWS versions. The AWS version is far better. It works seamlessly and integrates very well with some other services. We have integrated it with Splunk for the security aspects and with identity and access management for configuration purposes.

CB
System Administrator at DeepMap
Real User
2018-12-11T08:30:00Z
11 December 18

Talk to their technical services to make sure you are getting the right size solution for what you want to do. The product is easy use. I don't have to think twice when I am using it. I know it is doing its job. Customer support has been great. We are using both the AWS and on-premise versions. Both versions are about the same. The interface is nice and easy to configure. I like that it seems like it is one platform to manage.

Pradeep Kurra - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Practice Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2018-12-11T08:30:00Z
11 December 18

I would recommend the product, and tell people, "Go for it." It has not disappointed us for the purpose that we use it. It is really matured in the networking area. Because of our use case, we didn't have to integrate the product with anything else. The AWS side of the product is a seven out of ten rating. The on-premise side of the product is a ten out of ten for a rating.

PT
Solution Architect at JM Family Enterprises
Real User
2018-12-11T08:30:00Z
11 December 18

I would recommend to try it out.

Dan Rabinowitz - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Infrastructure at Arcadia
Real User
2018-12-05T07:52:00Z
05 December 18

Do a demo. Set one up and try it. We have used both the physical and AWS versions. The physical version is a good product. However, in an AWS environment, the ability to automate and scale pieces of it are critical. We integrated a couple other products with it, which seems to be working well.

Related Questions
Netanya Carmi - PeerSpot reviewer
Content Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
Oct 03, 2021
What are the pros and cons of each?
See 1 answer
03 October 21
Both products are very stable and easily scalable. The setup of Azure Firewall is easy and very user-friendly and the overall cost is reasonable. Azure Firewall offers a solid threat awareness, can easily identify threat risks, and gives users the ability to set filters to deny traffic from problematic malicious domains or IP addresses. Azure Firewall allows for the creation of virtual IP addresses, which makes it very attractive. Palo Alto VM Series can launch very quickly and makes it easy to move firewalls when needed. It offers great incoming and outgoing traffic control, which gives greater awareness with regard to threat and malware protection. Azure Firewall can be challenging when implementing across various regions and this solution could also be more customizable. Although it offers some great filtering options, it lacks some of the advanced features that some other solutions provide. Palo Alto VM Series can be a very complex solution to use and could be simplified. The VM series does not integrate that well with other solutions. It also does not have a cloud-based solution that offers a secure gateway, which can be problematic for many enterprises. The reporting processes need to be improved. We found that it lacks what many other solutions are offering. Conclusion Both the Azure Firewall and Palo Alto VM Series provide very secure options with regard to traffic control and threat awareness. As with many solutions, each of these has different capabilities that meet the varying needs of today’s complex and challenging business environments. While Azure Firewall offers ease of use and control overall, the Palo Alto VM series provides different options for more complex business situations. Choosing the best firewall solution for your enterprise really depends on the type of traffic, situation, and business.
Nurit Sherman - PeerSpot reviewer
Content Operations Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
Aug 10, 2021
Hi community,  Is it required in your company to conduct a security review before purchasing a firewall? Also, do you need to perform reviews after (how often)? What are the common materials you use in the review? Do you have any tips or advice?  Any pitfalls to watch out for?
2 out of 23 answers
it_user904572 - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner with 1-10 employees
23 July 18
Yes, I recommend doing a security review regularly. Not necessarily before a firewall purchase unless you have not done one lately. Having the results of the review will help you understand what capabilities you need in a firewall. As an example, if you get a ton of login attempts from outside your country of origin but have no customers or partners outside the country you will want to have "country blocking" capabilities. There are a number of tools that can be used for evaluations. We currently use RMM and Security tools from SolarWinds. We have other tools as well. To perform a security review you have to have tools do the work. It simply is not possible for an individual to perform a thorough check without significant automation. We offer this as a service as well. Pro's: SolarWinds has a free version of some of the useful tools such as SIEM Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Tool. You can rent some tools by going though a partner (such as us BayStateTechnology.com) Con's: Tools to purchase are a bit expensive. Performance checks that RMM uses is not accurate on large busy machines. Support leaves much to be desired.
Matthew Titcombe - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO & Sr. Information Security Consultant at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
23 July 18
The only question for a review would be based on your requirements. For example, does the firewall meet Common Criteria standards or other security controls. Generally, we suggest pursuing a NGFW and our initial recommendation is Fortinet. Good news is the NSS results put Fortinet as the #1.
Download Free Report
Download our free Palo Alto Networks VM-Series Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
DOWNLOAD NOW
633,572 professionals have used our research since 2012.