We performed a comparison between Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"The security on offer is very good."
"The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"Fortinet FortiGate protects against internet-based threats, both internal and external. It is scalable, stable, easy to use, and easy to install."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is security. They are known for efficiency and are on the top of Gartner Quadrant reviews. Fortinet FortiGate has an easy-to-use platform with a good graphical interface. The configuration is simple and the solution provides an overall good layer of security."
"Web filtering and two-factor authentication are great features."
"This solution is user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS."
"The most effective features for threat prevention are application-based prevention and WildFire. These features cover various threats, such as ransomware, malware, etc. They provide real-time visibility. By applying appropriate policies, threats can be blocked."
"We can monitor the traffic manually and detect threats. Additionally, we can block different IP addresses and URLs."
"The most effective features of the solution for threat prevention are Layer 7 inspection, SSL decryption, IPS, and the web filtering profile."
"The most valuable feature is that you can control your traffic flowing out and coming it, allowing you to apply malware and threat protection, as well as vulnerability checks."
"What I like about the VM-Series is that you can launch them in a very short time."
"We use the product on our Azure network firewalls."
"The solution strengthens our IT posture."
"The solution could be more secure and stable."
"The pricing could always be better."
"If I had any criticism that I would give FortiGate, it would be that they need to stop changing their logging format. Every time we do a firmware upgrade, it is a massive issue on the SIM. Parsers have to be rebuilt. Even the FortiGate guys came in and said that they don't play well in the sandbox."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"The main aspect of FortiGate that could be improved is load balancing. Our management team does not want to buy another appliance for only load balancing."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"It would be ideal if they had some sort of GUI interface for troubleshooting and diagnostics."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"I haven't seen any feature that will allow me direct authentication for a VPN solution."
"The tool is very costly."
"It can definitely improve on the performance."
"We feel that the setup was complex. So, we asked the tech team about the setup process. They explained how to deploy it in the right way, which made it very simple."
"Integrative capabilities with other solutions should be addressed."
"It has to be more scalable for the deployment of VMs on the cloud."
"There is no proper support channel to follow up on cases."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"The product needs improvement in their Secure Access Service Edge."
Earn 20 points
Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] writes "User-Friendly, improves security, and gives me more control over my VoIP". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
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.