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 technical support in our region is excellent."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"UTM/NGFW features and FortiCloud for logs and backups are awesome."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"The main reason why I purchased the particular unit was that it had good reviews and what other people were saying as far as its completeness and its leading capabilities in terms of endpoint security was very good."
"The VPN allows users to connect remotely and securely."
"The most valuable features are all of the security features in terms of protection and SSL and VPN."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is how it keeps up-to-date with viruses."
"Remote access is excellent."
"Using WildFire has reduced the number of viruses and the amount of malware that comes into our system, which means that I don't have to rely on the end-users to identify it."
"Intuitive threat prevention and analysis solution, with a machine learning feature. Scalable, stable, and protects against zero-day threats."
"The graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure."
"The solution is completely integrated with all the other Palo Alto products. I think that it is the best part for endpoint protection. The firewall features include URL and DNS filtering, threat protection, and antivirus."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks WildFire are the good URL and file analysis that uses artificial intelligence. It has different interfaces, such as rest, SMTP protocol, and HTTPS. The Security incidents and event management are very good. Additionally, there are many file types that are supported and there is no limit to the number of files it can handle simultaneously. It integrates well with SIEM solutions."
"I would like to see improvements in the product's application rules."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"We have an issue with hotel guest vouchers."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"The way everything is set up could be easier. Currently, people need a lot of experience and knowledge to administer it and to link it to devices."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"The routing capability on the FortiGate devices has room for improvement."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"Multi-factor authentication would have been a plus in security at the time."
"Any enhancements should likely be focused on the firewall appliance to further strengthen overall security capabilities, such as refining app and user identity features."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"The price of WildFire should be reduced in order to make it more affordable for our customers."
"The GUI is better in 8.0, but I still feel it lacks the fast response most of us desire. Logs are much quicker."
"The cost of the solution is excessively high."
"The only problem with this solution is the cost. It's expensive."
"The technical support response needs improvement."
"The only complaint that we receive from our customers is in regards to the price."
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, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, 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.