We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is #8 ranked solution in best firewalls. IT Central Station users give Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls an average rating of 8 out of 10. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most commonly compared to Fortinet FortiGate:Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs Fortinet FortiGate. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 49% of users researching this solution on IT Central Station. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 25% of all views.
What is Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls?

Palo Alto Networks' next-generation firewalls secure your business with a prevention-focused architecture and integrated innovations that are easy to deploy and use. Now, you can accelerate growth and eliminate risks at the same time.

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls was previously known as Palo Alto NGFW, Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall, Palo Alto Networks PA-Series.

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Buyer's Guide

Download the Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Customers

SkiStar AB, Ada County, Global IT Services PSF, Southern Cross Hospitals, Verge Health, University of Portsmouth, Austrian Airlines, The Heinz Endowments

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Video

Archived Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Mahmoud Salaheldin
Security Unit Manager at EEMC
Real User
Leaderboard
Protects your network against attacks and threats and enables you to know what's going on in your network from security perspective

Pros and Cons

  • "The initial setup was very easy."
  • "The advanced manual protection needs to be improved a little bit because they used to make a cloud manual analysis for the cloud."

What is our primary use case?

Upstream and data center NGFW.

How has it helped my organization?

Security, visibility and control, you can secure your environment from many types of attacks such as virus, malware, DoS attacks, intrusions, bad URLs, bad domains with basic DNS security which it an awesome feature.Visibility, that you will be aware of the is going on inside your network, such as malicious activities, decrypt the encrypted packets, as well as policy audit review.

This solution has really helped the technical engineers to deliver the implementation faster than the before.

What is most valuable?

All of the features are good. The new release of the new basic platform provides you with a huge number of features, such as policy review, DNS security, Machine learning, Network traffic profiling, Bare metal analysis

What needs improvement?

(Malware) On-prime scanning should be considered.

Endpoint management (traps) better to be on-prime than cloud.

QoS, It should be more sophisticated than it is now.

TAC support should cover meddle east area by Arabic support, such as in France, Germany, Italy and Japanese.



For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for more than nine years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I like the stability of the solution. From a stability perspective, all of them are stable. Sometimes Cisco's older versions, maybe from two years ago, were not as stable. Now, Cisco has improved its firewall and security products.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, no security products are scalable to upgrade. Not ever. While assuming you are dealing with scalability, you have room to increase or to have room to expand, but actually, you don't because there is limited support. Even if you bring in the highest model, it's still limited.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their support is very limited. It's limited compared to the competitors. They need multi-language support. Now, they provide support in English only. 

If anyone in the Middle East opens a ticket, they have to do it in Arabic but they get support in English, not in Arabic. The communication between the technical people or the campus sites to the vendors now is in English.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very easy. All the initial setups have become very easy. Before, the setup used to take a week to implement a firewall. Now it's a couple of minutes or one day maximum for fine-tuning. To fine-tune the firewall it can take one day, two days if you are junior. In terms of how many people you will need to deploy the solution, it depends because the firewall is not a straightforward technology like any security program. 

What about the implementation team?

We used on-site security advisors.

What was our ROI?

7 years

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

In terms of pricing, every model has a license. For example a small model, the license around 1,000 USD. The next one around 2,000 USD. The next range is 11,000 USD to 13,000 USD. It's expensive compared to PaloAlto competitors.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Yes, was fortinet

What other advice do I have?

Palo Alto's firewall protects your network against attacks, threats, and many other things. Networking can be more advanced. You can upgrade the edition of Palo Alto. There's competition between Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls. Most IT security people don't know which to pick. For a basic firewall, I recommend Fortinet because it has two or three basic firewalls. I personally need a data center firewall. Datacenter firewalls I would recommend FortiGate because of the support. It provides a high level of support.

The latest Palo Alto release has many new features. It can provide you with audits, and policy auditing for a policy review. This allows you to know what's going on inside the network from a quality perspective because sometimes you can create new policies - up to one million policies. You can choose policies, and sometimes you get something by mistake. It provides you with an ability to view or do a policy review or policy audit. This is a major feature. It's a very important feature because before it was impossible to bring the visibility to the policy audits to let me know what's going on inside my policies. Now Palo Alto has provided this feature. 

In terms of advice I'd give to someone considering this solution, I'd say they should read more before going to the implementation phase. They have to read the administrative guides, and product guides before going to implementation. They have to check the platform because different versions of the platform have some new features. The technical people have to review before going to implement it because sometimes they don't need to upgrade this platform or this version. It is not a stable version. You have to read more before going to do the implementation. Ask an advisor, the vendors or call Palo Alto. You can call them, they have great coverage in any country in the world. You can ask the technical engineers what is the best design, their recommended design.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Jonny Su
IS&S Europe and Global Infrastructure Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Great at threat prevention and has good policy-based routing features

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features are the threat prevention and policy-based routing features."
  • "I think they need to have a proper hardware version for a smaller enterprise. We had to go to a very high-end version which is very expensive. If we chose the lower-end version, it would not meet our goals. A middle-end is missing in its portfolio."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution as a firewall. We use it for VPN setup, threat protection, and for internet breakout also. We actually deploy several different versions. We have a TA200, a PA820, and a PA3200 series.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the threat prevention and policy-based routing features. 

What needs improvement?

I think they need to have a proper hardware version for a smaller enterprise. We had to go to a very high-end version which is very expensive. If we chose the lower-end version, it would not meet our goals. A middle-end is missing in its portfolio.

For example, there's the PA820 and the PA220, but there's nothing between. So they are really missing some kind of small-size or medium-size usage. Right now, you have to choose either a big one or you have a very small one, which is not really good.

In the next release, it would be helpful if there was some kind of a visualized feature that showed the traffic flow, or something like that, to be able to simulate. When we define something if we could see a simulation of how the flow will be treated that would be great. Because today everything is done by experts by checking logs, but it's very time-consuming. If there's also a simulator to use when you apply some configuration, you can also apply on the simulator, to copy the configuration. So, you can see maybe to generate some traffic and to see how it will be treated. That will be very good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is pretty stable. Once you have it configured, normally it shouldn't have any issues. It does sometimes impact the metric flow, but that's natural because it filters everything going through, so it slows down the speed.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I don't think that product is really scalable. You have to either replace it with a higher version or use what you have. I think that's the only way. You cannot add something to increase its capacity, so you have to replace the current equipment to a new version or a new, higher version.

How are customer service and technical support?

For technical support, we have a contract with some local suppliers. It depends on our partner, so it's probably different from location to location, but as long as they are certified with Palo Alto, normally they should have a one or two experts in their organization. So you just need to find a good person to work with.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did previously have a different kind of a firewall. We used Check Point before. We also used NetScreen and Cisco. But in the end, we defined our standard and now use Palo Alto.

How was the initial setup?

Firewalls are never easy. You have to have very good network expertise to set it up, so it's not about the product being easy to use or not. It's because of the nature of the firewall. You have to understand how it works, how it should be set up, and to understand your data flows and things like that. 

I'm not really the person who does the hands-on setup and integration. I'm the guy who monitors the global deployment. I'm in charge of defining the standard, to deploy the standard to the site, but there's an operational team to do the final installation, configuration, and those types of things.

On the one side, it will take maybe two or three days to enable the firewall, but if you are talking about the global deployment, that depends on the budget, and the resources that will take different time periods to deploy worldwide, so we are still not finished for all the locations. So we are still doing it.

Globally we have around 100 locations. We have two major network engineers who manage the firewall, but to deploy it you also need a local IT because they have to physically be on site. And the two experts remotely control the equipment, configuration, and upgrades, etc. So it's very hard to say how many people you need. It depends on your company size and where your locations are based. For us, we have two dedicated people, but we also have the local IT when we need them to physically help in the integration. 

What about the implementation team?

We do use external partners for the setup. We use also our internal teams as well.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It's a bit pricey.

What other advice do I have?

Once you install it, you use it every day. You can't stop because it's a security feature and a precaution. Also, we are using it to do some local breakouts, so we use utilize the local internet to carry some business traffic, to ensure there's no interruption. You have to let it run 24/7.

I would suggest you be careful when choosing your model. Consider your bandwidth as well as how you want to run the local area network because the throughput of the firewall has to be well designed.

I would rate this solution a nine out of10.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
554,529 professionals have used our research since 2012.
IG
Head of Information Network Security at FRA
Real User
Enables us to differentiate between Oracle and SQL traffic but it could use more reporting tools

Pros and Cons

  • "We have found the application control to be the most valuable feature. Also, Layer 7, because all other products are working up to the maximum capacity. But Palo Alto is benefiting us, especially in application control management. We are able to differentiate between Oracle traffic and SQL traffic."
  • "The solution needs some management tool enhancements. It could also use more reporting tools."

What is our primary use case?

We use the firewall for securing the data center. We have designed it to be a two-stage firewall. We have a perimeter firewall which is not Palo Alto, and then the Palo Alto firewall which is acting as a data center firewall. We are securing our internal network, so we have created different security zones. And we assign each zone a particular task.

What is most valuable?

We have found the application control to be the most valuable feature. Also, Layer 7, because all other products are working up to the maximum capacity. But Palo Alto is benefiting us, especially in application control management. We are able to differentiate between Oracle traffic and SQL traffic.

What needs improvement?

The solution needs some management tool enhancements. It could also use more reporting tools. And if the solution could enhance the VPN capabilities, that would be good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with this solution for four to five years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable, but I think the local providers have no sufficient products. We are looking for more support. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is very scalable. We are trying to increase usage. We are planning already to increase our internet center. We are planning to extend our users to around 1,500. Currently, we have about 700 users.

How are customer service and technical support?

The local consultant support needs some improvement. External support is sufficient for us.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was easy for us to implement.

What about the implementation team?

We used a consultant for the deployment portion.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Kumar_Rajesh
Vice President & Head Technology Transition at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
The solution is generally stable, and easily scalable

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is scalable"
  • "The support could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We have multiple IPS applications, and other multiple use cases.

What is most valuable?

We are using pretty much all of the features. This is deployed in our parameter and pretty much provides for different functionalities, for all incoming traffic and outgoing traffic.

What needs improvement?

The support could be improved.

The next release could use more configuration monitoring on this one, and additional features on auditing.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is generally stable. There are no issues. We have forty-thousand users.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable, yes. We don't plan on increasing usage.

How are customer service and technical support?

We are being provided with decent support but some of the RCS, some of the issues can be resolved much faster.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Check Point. We switched because of certain features: entire equity, ideas, application visibility, single interfacing, etc.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was complex. We're in the process of replacing it in seventy or so locations, and setup is still ongoing, but going well. It was complex because of the multiple zones that we had to create. We had multiple interfaces so there are multiple complexities that we had to address. We don't require extra staff to maintain the solution.

What about the implementation team?

We implemented through a system integrator.

What was our ROI?

We have seen a return on investment. 

I don't have data points, but some of the use cases that we have already delivered to the organization have shown that a lot of threats have been identified and has been blocked. I don't know how you can quantify that. At the same time, the effort was significantly reduced on the deployment of new routes based on this.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I think, if you compare, they're a little costly next to Cisco of Check Point, but they offer a lot of other additional features to look at. The licensing is annual, and there aren't any additional fees on top of that.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We actually did not but we were using two or three other products already, so we had a good idea of what to expect.

What other advice do I have?

I'd say the blueprint of the implementation needs to be ready before you start the implementation of the product. The product is generally stable and the team provides a good presence on it, but at the end, if you're putting it in the mission-critical data center, the planning needs to be extensive.

I would rate this solution an eight and a half out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
MA
IT Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
I found it more intuitive compared to other products. Scalability is a big problem if you don't plan in advance for network traffic usage

Pros and Cons

  • "I found Palo Alto NG firewalls more intuitive compared to other products. I value the capability to identify a cloud solution."
  • "The scalability compared to other products is not good. You need to change the box whenever you want your number of connection sessions to increase."

What is our primary use case?

Our solution is now based on clustering and load balancing. We can add more nodes to our environment to accommodate the new load within our company.

We have about 2,000 to 2,300 users on Palo Alto NG firewall support.

Palo Alto has a line of products for different customers. If you do the sizing it from the beginning, considering that you are a growing company, it is fine.

You need to plan for the future, which means that you have to pay in advance through investment. With Palo Alto NG Firewalls, the cost will be higher.

How has it helped my organization?

We would like to have the processing power to be enhanced with every new CPU so that we are getting more cores. Palo Alto is incorporating this. 

We are requesting now a new firewall that will come in with higher power, i.e. the 5220.

What is most valuable?

I found Palo Alto NG firewalls more intuitive compared to other products. I value the capability to identify a cloud solution.

What needs improvement?

Palo Alto has a good product and end-user experience. It's great. They can maybe add more processing power to their hardware. That's it. 

Sometimes it's stuck and you need to restart it. They have been adding a lot of things, so we need to upgrade for the new features.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Palo Alto firewalls for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto NG is a stable product as long as it's working. It does what it expected to do. But sometimes for some reason the hardware resources spike, so it stops responding. 

The only fix is to restart the firewall,i.e. a  hardware restart. This is one of the issues. It's not related to the software because of the troubleshooting that we did. 

It's about resource consumption. Some hardware and software issues Palo Alto needs to work on. They released their Palo Alto Operating System which enhanced their product suite.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability compared to other products is not good. You need to change the box whenever you want your number of connection sessions to increase. 

You can't just upgrade the parts with a software key or with adding additional hardware. You need to replace the entire box. It's not scalable. 

How are customer service and technical support?

The solution's technical support is responsive. They are good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used a different solution that was Fortinet. I'm still using it. There's another area in the network where we use Fortinet.

How was the initial setup?

We shifted from Fortinet to Palo Alto. It's just mapping the network from the available firewall to another firewall. It wasn't complex. 

Between deployment and stabilization, the product was completed in two weeks, i.e. 10 working days.

What about the implementation team?

One of my team did the installation under my supervision.

What other advice do I have?

You have to do proper network design from the beginning. You have to look into future expansion. Otherwise, after a year, you have to replace the entire box.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a seven because the point of scalability within their product is a big issue. 

If you have to put a huge investment in front to accommodate future expansion, it is fine. 

It requires forecasting. If your forecast is not correct and you are not growing to that point, then all your investments will be a waste. 

If you're adding a block so that it can accommodate your user traffic demand, then that would be perfect. 

I buy one block at a time now. I can't buy two blocks at the same time. That's a waste of money with Palo Alto NG firewalls.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
it_user1009449
CTO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Overall a good product

What is our primary use case?

I'm using many solutions. I'm working as a CTO for a big company here. I work with Palo Alto and Cisco.

How has it helped my organization?

I have to support many vendors. We are a system integrator.

What is most valuable?

Most features in Palo Alto are okay, but we have had some issues like publicity not working. Comments have some delay, but overall, it's a good product.

What needs improvement?

Palo Alto NG firewalls can be improved in support of finance and banking. We need better affiliations for profiling the user.  The product has some delay in the maintenance. They have to find some solution to make updates quicker.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with firewalls for 20 years. For next-generation firewalls, it's…

What is our primary use case?

I'm using many solutions. I'm working as a CTO for a big company here. I work with Palo Alto and Cisco.

How has it helped my organization?

I have to support many vendors. We are a system integrator.

What is most valuable?

Most features in Palo Alto are okay, but we have had some issues like publicity not working. Comments have some delay, but overall, it's a good product.

What needs improvement?

Palo Alto NG firewalls can be improved in support of finance and banking. We need better affiliations for profiling the user. 

The product has some delay in the maintenance. They have to find some solution to make updates quicker.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with firewalls for 20 years. For next-generation firewalls, it's about four or five years.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this product 8.5/10. It's very good.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Aleksandar Jovanovic
System Engineer at E-smart systems
Real User
Top 20
Improved traffic visibility and management after replacing our open-source solution

Pros and Cons

  • "With our High availability pair, we have had no downtime for several years, since it was first put it in production."
  • "When you delete and add a new rule, because of the one hundred rule limit, if the new rule has an ID that is greater than one hundred, even though you have fewer than that, it will not work."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution for WAN routing, NAT, VPN tunnels, granular security policies, URL filtering, antivirus, threat prevention, sandboxing, decryption, high availability, and reporting.

How has it helped my organization?

Palo Alto has improved traffic visibility, and the ability to manage it. With Palo Alto, we have more flexibility and our network is more secure. With our High availability pair, we have had no downtime for several years, since it was first put it in production. We have even changed boxes for new models during this time.

What is most valuable?

Palo Alto is easy to use, feature-rich, and it has good technical support. You can fetch users, so you have visibility by username, IP address, destination, application, and you can even define a custom application.

In the GUI, you can easily find blocked traffic and the reason for it.

What needs improvement?

The only thing that is a little strange is in Policy-Based Forwarding. When you delete and add a new rule, because of the one hundred rule limit, if the new rule has an ID that is greater than one hundred, even though you have fewer than that, it will not work. The same thing happens when you are renaming a rule. The new rule will have a new ID, so it is possible for it to be greater than one hundred. This can be easily fixed by using one command from CLI, but you have to be aware of it.

For how long have I used the solution?

Six years.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support for this solution is good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Our previous solution was open source, and not so easy to manage. We had a Linux Iptables firewall, Squid + DansGuardian proxy, and an OpenVPN server. We replaced all of these solutions with Palo Alto.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If you have some network experience then you can set it up on your own, with no setup costs. Don't buy a device with more power than you really need, because licensing depends on the cost of the box you have.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated Sophos, SonicWall, and Fortinet.

What other advice do I have?

PA is a product that continuously improves, so, I have nothing to add in terms of features.

My advice is not to look for a cheaper solution, as the price/performance ratio on Palo Alto is great.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Jean Maurice  Prosper
Chief Executive Officer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Provides a high level of security and the app ID is very good

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is very stable."
  • "Generating reports is not so easy."

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use this solution for the core banking network. It's for core security. So it's to protect against intrusion, to protect against any kind of cyber attack that can happen to it. It protects our core infrastructure.

How has it helped my organization?

Mostly it's improved the security side. There was no security before, and we were looking for a solution that could give us the exact capacity to do all the configurations that we need, while also providing a high level of security. 

What is most valuable?

The app ID is very good.

What needs improvement?

The support needs improvement. Also, better reporting of errors would be good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solutions for over 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is not so good. Because if you want to upgrade, you have to change the service completely. We have about 2000 users.

How are customer service and technical support?

It's a long wait time, although sometimes it's been quicker to get them. Occasionally, the type of answers provided are not so great.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used to use Check Point, but we switched. It's because we found Palo Alto is better. Check Point is much slower, more expensive.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward for us. We are technology oriented, so for us, it was straightforward. No complexities. For deployment, we needed about 5 people. Maintenance is only three people. Three engineers are looking after the books.

What about the implementation team?

We did the implementation ourselves.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I would advise anyone to go ahead and understand exactly what they need. It's not because Palo Alto's cost is a little less. Depending on use, it's expensive. So they should understand the requirements first, before going with Palo Alto.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We previously had Check Point and eventually compared it with the Palo Alto screening, which proved that Palo Alto was the best. It was not a difficult choice.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. Generating reports is not so easy. I think with support, for everyone, and for all the bank company workers, they can do that a bit better. Then maybe I would rate them higher.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
EmreBektas
Senior Technical Consultant at Exclusive GRP
Consultant
Valuable accessibility, antivirus, and stability features with a simple implementation

Pros and Cons

  • "The basic configuration will only take 15 minutes to set up"
  • "Customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities"

What is our primary use case?

We're customer facing; each customer uses it for a different purpose. Some use NG Firewalls for IPS capability, some for application capabilities, these kinds of things.

What is most valuable?

The accessibility, antivirus, and stability features are the most valuable. It's so stable, the customer can use the decryption features without impacting performance.

What needs improvement?

Most customers ask about the choice of features. It's limited. It's not arranged well for users. Also, customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities. I would like to implement individual profiles for each user. Capability, in general, is limited.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solutions for 2 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a very stable solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

I am the customer's technical support. If a customer has issues, they would call me.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was basic. It was very simple. The basic configuration will only take 15 minutes. Anyone can set it up. If a person has worked with a firewall before, they can do it themselves. You only need one person for deployment.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Licensing is on a three year basis. Customers prefer one to three years. Licencing is pretty expensive. Check Point is cheaper than Palo Alto. There's also an international license. If a customer wants to control different things, they will need an extra license. 

What other advice do I have?

I've helped customers using Fortinet and Check Point. They are compromised. Their firewall is not stable. But for some features, for example, encryption, they want to use this feature, but the firewall feature isn't great. With Palo Alto, there isn't any problem, you can open any feature - IPS feature, data encryption feature - there isn't an issue.

Implementation is simple, the product is stable, but I advise if people get the firewall I strongly recommend the use of the API features. They may not be accustomed to using a next-generation firewall. If they want to use NG Firewalls, they need to use and implement the API features. They need to create uses based on the application.

My understanding is Version 9 will introduce some logic features.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
OO
Sales Engineer at a wholesaler/distributor with 51-200 employees
Real User
Good configuration capabilities, easy scaling abilities, and good functionality

Pros and Cons

  • "Good functionality and features."
  • "Could also use better customer support."

What is our primary use case?

I use the solution for firewalls.

What is most valuable?

I find the configuration the most valuable.

What needs improvement?

The support in our country can be slow sometimes. It's a slow website. It could also use better customer support.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 1.5 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution's stability is normal.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

My impression of the scalability is that it is easy.

How are customer service and technical support?

I contacted technical support a lot of times. Most of the time, they were pretty good, but sometimes technical support couldn't resolve the issue, and they don't know what to do.

How was the initial setup?

The setup of the firewalls has medium difficulty. On one configuration it was easy, and on another one it was hard. Sometimes it's normal to configure sometimes it's more complex. You only need one person, maybe two, for deployment at a company.

What about the implementation team?

I did the implementation myself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

At our company, we sell the solution for another vendor, and they sell to another vendor. So our pricing is more expensive than other vendors. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I didn't look at any other vendors.

What other advice do I have?

The functionality is good and so are the features. In terms of implementing the solution, I wish it was better. I would rate the solution 8 out of 10, mostly due to the technical issues I've experienced.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Denis L
Sales Solutions Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Reseller
Top 5Leaderboard
Enables us to evaluate traffic in the customer environment by providing detailed reporting on the traffic and applications

Pros and Cons

  • "One of the best firewalls on the market."
  • "The user interface is a bit clumsy and not very user-friendly."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use for this product is for security as a firewall by a sales engineer for the guest environment.

How has it helped my organization?

It allowed us to evaluate traffic in the customer environment by providing detailed reporting on the traffic and applications.

What is most valuable?

The WildFire feature is one of the best features in this firewall. WildFire extends the capabilities of Palo Alto firewalls to block malware. The best feature for the reseller is Service Lifecycle Reviewer, SLR. You deploy Palo Alto Network Firewall to the customer environment and it collects data about customer environment, customer traffic. After a week, Palo Alto generates a report to review the traffic. The report tells what applications were touched and how users used these applications in the environment, as well as additional details. So for resellers, you just go to the customer, deploy the Palo Alto in the basic mode so the customer doesn't need to customize anything in their environment because Palo Alto works to meter traffic out of the box.

Of course, the reports register app ID, user ID, the space of the app IDs, the database of these app IDs and other common data. It is a great feature in the Palo Alto product.

What needs improvement?

The manufacturer can improve the product by improving the configuration. Some of the menus are difficult to navigate when trying to find particular features. It is not entirely intuitive or convenient. You might need to configure a feature in one menu and next you need to go to another tab and configure another part of the feature in another tab. It's not very user-friendly in that way. On the other hand, it's still more user-friendly than using the console. But this is certainly one feature they can improve.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a great firewall, really one of the best in the market. It is one of few firewalls that can claim to be better than Cisco. It functions well, is very stable, and its reputation is known in the market.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I think that the product is very customizable. If you don't need to protect a lot of assets, you can buy a small firewall at a low price for small needs, but if you need you can buy a bigger solution with more features. Scalability is very easy with Palo Alto Networks.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Actually, I have moved away from using this product because of changes in duties.

How was the initial setup?

Installation is really very straightforward. You just need to plug it in and connect to the environment and that's all. Deployment time depends on the size of the environment and customer needs. Some customers just need two or three policies and that's all. But some customers need more policies designed to cover the needs of specific departments. So deployment depends on the size of your environment. If it's a small company, it's not very hard to deploy the main features of Palo Alto, it may take an hour but not more than a day. It depends on the customer needs and size of the environment.

What about the implementation team?

I work as the system integrator, so I install instances of Palo Alto myself. It was the first security product that I learned to work with.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller.
reviewer1132443
User
Real User
Country blocking, URL filtering, reporting, and visibility help to enforce our acceptable use policies

Pros and Cons

  • "One of the things I really like about it is that we have the same features and functions available on the entry-level device (PA-220), as do large corporations with much more costly appliances."
  • "The initial configuration is complicated to set up."

What is our primary use case?

I use the PA-220 to protect the LAN at my small-ish (about twenty people) office. We have several remote users who use the GlobalProtect VPN. As we move into a data center for hosting, I'll buy a second PA-220 to set up a site-to-site VPN. We also have a VM-50 for internal testing and lab use. 

How has it helped my organization?

I'm writing this review because it's a great product and I think it's ranked much too low on the review ratings. One of the things I really like about it is that we have the same features and functions available on the entry-level device (PA-220), as do large corporations with much more costly appliances.

With all the bells and whistles turned on, I can block access to websites based on their location (country), content, or other criteria. The reporting is really useful and shows me the most frequently used applications, and provides me with great visibility as to what my network users are doing on the internet. With this firewall in place, I can finally enforce the variety of acceptable use policies which have existed only on paper. 

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are blocking traffic by country, and URL filtering to improve policy compliance and our overall cybersecurity posture. The ad blocker is also pretty handy. Moreover, the VPN client has turned out to be more useful than I initially thought, and the users love the 'one-click' connect. 

What needs improvement?

The initial configuration is complicated to set up. You really have to know what you're doing. I attribute that to all of the features and functions that are built into the product. Luckily, Palo Alto has a great support site and you can find contractors who are knowledgeable in the technology.

For how long have I used the solution?

One year.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support for this solution is great.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously we used a pfSense firewall. I was very unhappy with it, as it had a limited feature set and was not intuitive to configure. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex, due to all the features offered. You really have to know what you're doing.

What about the implementation team?

Implemented through a vendor who was knowledgeable with the product. It took at least a few months of tweaking before we got the firewall to the point it's currently at. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It will be worth your time to hire a contractor to set it up and configure it for you, especially if you are not very knowledgeable with PA firewalls. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We looked at Cisco Meraki, but I wasn't really all that happy with it. 

What other advice do I have?

I've used it and I'm very happy. Frankly, I think this site under-rates the technology, as it should be in at least the top three.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Rakesh Rawat
Network Engineer at Acliv Technologies Pvt Ltd
Real User
Secures and deeply analyzes connections

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is the ability to deeply analyze the connection or connection type."
  • "Overall it is good. It is reliable and easy to understand. However, the monitoring feature could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution to block malicious or suspicious activity by creating policies that define which action should be blocked or allowed.

How has it helped my organization?

The firewall is a security device. We use this solution to create policies like ISPs for a specific purpose. We only allow the policies for a particular application, so this is a way for the firewall to secure an unwanted connection.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the ability to deeply analyze the connection or connection type.

What needs improvement?

Overall it is good. It is reliable and easy to understand. However, the monitoring feature could be improved.

They have many solutions already. I don't think I have seen any missing features. Every device has different functions, but as a firewall, this solution has a lot.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability is good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There are no scalability issues to date.

We have about 2,500 users behind the firewall using this solution. I think we don't have any requirement to increase usage. Currently, we have around 2,500 users, but if this increases, we may need a new requirement.

We hired one or two people to maintain the solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good. Once you call up with your issue, it takes around one or two hours for them to contact and give you a solution accordingly.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Cisco ASA. We switched because of legal reasons and difficulty to understand. That's why they had decided to change to Firewall.

How was the initial setup?

It is very easy to use. It's straightforward, easy to understand, and easy to configure.

What about the implementation team?

Deployment time depends on your requirements. If you talk about the system requirements, it hardly takes up to 15 or 20 minutes for the configuration.

That said, it totally depends on your requirements: What kind of policy you require that supports what kind of block, etc.

The deployment time would change based on these requirements, but the system configuration: accessing the internet and creating policies hardly takes 20 minutes.

Deployment is configured by administrators, so if we have any kind of issue in policies or any confusion, we get tech support.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing is yearly, but it depends. You could pay on a yearly basis or every three years.

If you want to add a device or two, there would be an additional cost. Also, if you want to do an assessment or another similar add-on you have to pay accordingly for the additional service.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We also evaluated Check Point and Fortinet solutions.

What other advice do I have?

This solution is easy to understand, reliable, and user-friendly.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
TM
Partner at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
It has better manageability and overall features than its competitors

Pros and Cons

  • "We standardized on the product and got rid of several other types of firewalls from different vendors."
  • "It is very scalable."
  • "I would like integration with Evident.io and RedLock."
  • "The data loss prevention (DLP) capabilities need to be beefed up."

What is our primary use case?

Firewall.

How has it helped my organization?

We standardized on the product and got rid of several other types of firewalls from different vendors.

What is most valuable?

The firewall has a lot of sub-capabilities underneath it.

What needs improvement?

I would like integration with Evident.io and RedLock.

The data loss prevention (DLP) capabilities need to be beefed up.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have had that many problems, so we haven't had to engage with their tech support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I was not pleased with my previous solutions.

We switched to Palo Alto for better manageability and overall features.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

We deployed in-house.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Annually, the licensing costs are too much.

What other advice do I have?

I would certainly encourage someone to look into this solution.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
reviewer961413
IT Technician / Support
User
I like GlobalProtect, the URL filtering and the threat prevention, but the boot time should be improved on

What is our primary use case?

Finding a solution for easy management, where the company is protected in a matter where an unwanted software is blocked.

How has it helped my organization?

Functional and very futureproof but a bit hard to manage, and the worst thing is that it takes almost 20 mins to boot up, and to commit a config takes half that time.

What is most valuable?

GlobalProtect URL filtering Threat prevention.  These features are great, but they have drawbacks and could be a bit better, flexible, and easy to manage since it takes the admin time to get them right. 

What needs improvement?

Boot time Easy UI for the non-network specialists Commit time Virtualization Credit to Palo Alto knowledgebase. 

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What is our primary use case?

Finding a solution for easy management, where the company is protected in a matter where an unwanted software is blocked.

How has it helped my organization?

Functional and very futureproof but a bit hard to manage, and the worst thing is that it takes almost 20 mins to boot up, and to commit a config takes half that time.

What is most valuable?

  • GlobalProtect
  • URL filtering
  • Threat prevention. 

These features are great, but they have drawbacks and could be a bit better, flexible, and easy to manage since it takes the admin time to get them right. 

What needs improvement?

  • Boot time
  • Easy UI for the non-network specialists
  • Commit time
  • Virtualization
  • Credit to Palo Alto knowledgebase. 

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Bachir Elsitt
Network Security Engineer at Data Consult
Real User
Gives us visibility and protection for the entire network

Pros and Cons

  • "I like to install Palo Alto mainly on the data center side to have visibility into all VLANs. That gives full visibility into the core."
  • "I'm thinking about a new feature. They have decryption. It's a good idea to use decryption on Palo Alto. It would be good if they had offloading of the traffic, and if they could decrypt the traffic and offload it. Like, for example, ASM on our site. We have an SSL decryption to offload the traffic. We could use that on Palo Alto."

What is our primary use case?

I used Palo Alto firewalls for plenty of projects and have many use cases.

When working with App-ID, it is important to understand that each App-ID signature may have dependencies that are required to fully control an application. For example, with Facebook applications, the App‑ID Facebook‑base is required to access the Facebook website and to control other Facebook applications. For example, to configure the firewall to control Facebook email, you would have to allow the App-IDs Facebook-base and Facebook-mail.

How has it helped my organization?

I like to install Palo Alto mainly on the data center side to have visibility and protection into the network because we can configure the SVI (layer 3) on Palo Alto instead of the core switch.

It gives us full visibility and protection for the core of the network.

What is most valuable?

Visibility and Protection

It gives us good visibility into the network, and this is very important because it's the core of the network. All the packets go through the firewall.

MFA is a new feature in Palo Alto and it's good to use it.

What needs improvement?

I'm thinking about a new feature. They have decryption. It's a good idea to use decryption on Palo Alto. It would be good if they can offload the traffic.
Like, for example, SSL Offloading on F5. They have an SSL decryption to offload the traffic. 

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto is very stable. I worked on Cisco products like FTD and Firepower, and they are not as stable as Palo Alto. Also, some Fortigates are not stable. Palo Alto, as far as I know, is the most stable firewall compared to these others.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable because they are now using the next generation security network. They are integrating with endpoint protection. Palo Alto now has traps, so they integrate their traps and the next generation with the cloud. So it is scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support in Cisco is better than Palo Alto. In Cisco, you can directly talk to the top engineers.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Cisco ASA. When Cisco moved to the next generation firewall or tried to move to the next generation firewall when they acquired Sourcefire, and they announced Firepower on ASA, it was not a good option.
They had tool management so you could configure ASA from the CLI and you could configure it on the Firepower. You need to redirect the traffic from ASA to Firepower. It was not a good idea. The packets were processed but there was latency in the packets. 
Nowdays, FTD has many problems and bugs.

When selecting a vendor, the important criteria is how much the appliance is powerful and if it gives me the feature that I want, not an appliance that does everything and it will affect the throughput. Also, the value of the product, the price. 

There has to be a match between the price and the features.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Palo Alto, Cisco.

What other advice do I have?

Buy Palo Alto and try its features. In Palo Alto, you have select prevention, scan over AV, anti-spyware, vulnerability protection. and file blocking. you have good feature like WildFire to protect against unknown malware.

I rate Palo Alto at eight out of 10 because it gives me visibility and protection. This visibility and protection are very important nowadays to protect you from hackers.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
InfTech4985
Head, Information Technology at a construction company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Meets our expectations, providing application control, antivirus, and content filtering

Pros and Cons

  • "It has the typical features of a next-generation firewall. It can do application control, antivirus, content filtering, etc."
  • "I would like to see more in terms of reporting tools and the threat analysis capabilities."

What is our primary use case?

It is our main firewall. It has performed well. It meets our expectations.

What is most valuable?

It has the typical features of a next-generation firewall. It can do application control, antivirus, content filtering, etc. And in terms of performance, the value for money of the model that we bought is sufficient for our size.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see more in terms of reporting tools and the threat analysis capabilities.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

For our current size and our projected growth, it is sufficient. We are expecting to grow to about 1000 users. This is the type of bandwidth we need, based on our typical usage. The specific model we bought can scale up to that number. We built in that room for growth.

In addition, we can expand the scope not just as a firewall but also by doing some sandboxing and through integration with endpoint security solutions.

How are customer service and technical support?

I don't believe we have used any support directly from Palo Alto itself because we bought it through a local reseller. We engaged them to help us configure it and to put up some of the firewall rules that we need. So we work with a local vendor.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We had another box before and it wasn't a next-generation firewall. We needed to change to a next-generation firewall so we compared a few of the top players in the market and Palo Alto was the right one, in terms of the features that we need.

We were using an outdated firewall and, because of the growing threats, things were getting through. We were not able to filter some of the traffic the way we wanted. It was high time that we went with a next-generation firewall.

In terms of a vendor, in my case, I was referred to the local vendor, the one that we would be deploying and working with on the implementation. We definitely look for the competency, their knowledge of the subject matter, in this case, firewall technology, networks, etc., and their knowledge of the product. And, of course, the other factor is their commitment and their value-added solutions because sometimes we need them to go beyond to address a certain problem that we may have.

How was the initial setup?

I don't think setup is that complicated. There was just a bit of a learning curve because none of us had any experience with Palo Alto. But we know firewalls and it worked. It wasn't that difficult.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We called in proposals for different products, bigger players, like Check Point, Fortinet, Cisco. We set the criteria we need and had them make proposals. We found, based on the submissions, that Palo Alto seemed to be the one that had the most complete solution. We did a proof of concept to prove that whatever they said they can do, they can do. Once we passed that stage we proceeded with the purchase of the Palo Alto unit.

It came down to the technical evaluation we did. They did well in terms of performance. In addition, we liked the support terms that were proposed by the reseller. We also looked at certifications and reviews, at the NSS Labs reports, and other industry ratings. Palo Alto seemed to be up there. Also, looking toward the future, we can actually subscribe to sandboxing services in the cloud. There are also options for us to integrate with endpoint security solutions.

What other advice do I have?

List your requirements, give them the proper weighting, and look at what future options are available if you stick with the solution. Then do your evaluation. And don't forget the vendor, the local support, their competency and their commitment. You can have the best product in the world but if you don't get the right person to support you, it's a waste. You would probably better off with a second- or a third-tier product if you have an excellent, competent, and committed vendor to support you.

I would rate Palo Alto at eight out of 10 because of the performance, the security features, and policy management, the reporting capabilities, and the optional upgrades or extensions that we can do, like sandboxing. It also offers an option for our integration with our endpoint security.

We are going to revamp our endpoint security architecture. One of the options we're looking at is how we can integrate that with solutions from Palo Alto, because then we can have a more consolidated view, instead of using a third-party solution as the endpoint security. Finally, the local support is important.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Product Categories
Firewalls
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.