We performed a comparison between Check Point Power-1 [EOL] and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The Intrusion Prevention System and the web filtering are both working well."
"The base firewall features are quite valuable to us."
"The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"The simplicity of the product is great. It's very easy to use, which is a compliment we get all the time in terms of feedback."
"The technical support is great."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"The flexibility and ease of configuration are the most valuable features."
"The VPN allows users to connect remotely and securely."
"It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN."
"Their technical support is outstanding and top-notch."
"I love the idea of Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It's more geared toward preventing malware. If someone's laptop or phone is malware-infected, the tool prevents it from uploading valuable corporate data outside the corporate network. That's what I love about Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It stops malware in its tracks."
"Detailed reporting on analysis of content. The inspections are easily applied to security policy profiles and profile groups, and may be assigned on a per-rule basis."
"We get support in the free version."
"The scalability is acceptable."
"The way that the solution quickly updates to adjust to threats is the solution's most valuable aspect. When there's a security attack, within five minutes, all Wildfire subscribers have access to updates so that all systems will be safe. Its threat prevention is way better than other vendor products."
"High availability with active-active and active-passive modes."
"The command line is complicated, and the interface could be better."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"Usually, we sell the bundle with the UTM or threat management piece with IPS, IDS. Other providers, such as Palo Alto, are ahead in terms of safe functionality. So, for me, delivering truly safe service is probably something that still needs to be improved."
"The reporting in Fortinet FortiGate could improve. Customers are having to purchase additional reporting components. When I have used the Sophos solution it is a complete solution, in Fortinet FortiGate you have to use additional tools to have the features needed."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"The visibility of the network can be better. The GUI can be improved for better visibility of the network flow. Other solutions have better GUI in terms of network visibility."
"The sniffing packets or packet captures, can be simplified and improved because it's a little confusing."
"Fortinet should focus on enhancing the capabilities of FortiGate by consolidating its various products, such as FortiGate Cloud, FortiManager, and FortiAnalyzer."
"Multi-factor authentication would have been a plus in security at the time."
"The automation and responsiveness need improvement."
"Palo Alto Networks WildFire could improve by adding support for manual submission of suspicious files and URLs. Additionally, it would be an advantage to add rule-based analysis. Currently, it uses only static and AI. We need to be able to analyze archive files."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective."
"The cost of the solution is excessively high."
"The price of WildFire should be reduced in order to make it more affordable for our customers."
"The technical support response needs improvement."
"The product's false positive logs could be more user-friendly to understand. They could provide examples of precious cases to learn."
Earn 20 points
Check Point Power-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 2 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Check Point Power-1 [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point Power-1 [EOL] writes "Good intrusion prevention, firewall, and VPN capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Check Point Power-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Check Point SandBlast Network.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.