We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There is an easy process for configuring it, and it is straightforward to implement the device from scratch."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"It's very easy to set up, it's very easy to make policies and, for an organization, that means you don't need IT expert in firewalls. You just need to have somebody who knows a little bit of IT, and that's it. With other products, you need someone with a "Masters" degree in firewalls."
"The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"Fortinet offers the latest versions to cater to the needs of enterprises."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are it is one of the most mature firewalls in the UTM bundle."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"The feature that we like the most about Forcepoint is that we know the technology and have confidence in it. We can have several functionalities to simplify operations and management. We can combine functionalities like log ownership to review the number of devices in the infrastructure."
"I have found that Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is easy to use, highly secure, and the main VPN tunnel is created automatically which is a benefit."
"Forcepoint is a good, stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is controlling the traffic and the logging. They have real-time logins for traffic logs. Troubleshooting was very easy for me."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"The most valuable feature is the console management."
"The solution offers sandboxing, which can be integrated at any time."
"It is a scalable product. I know a customer who has deployed more than 4,000 firewalls in a single deployment."
"The machine learning in the core of the firewalls, for inline, real-time attack prevention, is very important to us. With the malware and ransomware threats that are out there, to keep abreast of and ahead of those types of attacks, it's important for our devices to be able to use AI to distinguish when there is malicious traffic or abnormal traffic within our environment, and then notify us."
"The fact that I can perform several security functions in one device at wire speed is a valuable feature. I don't have to slow down my business transactions, and I don't have to inconvenience my users with 16 different solutions. I can have it all in one box, and it protects my organization at wire speed."
"This solution not only provides better security than flat VLAN segments but allows easy movement through the lifecycle of the server."
"With its single pane of glass, it makes monitoring and troubleshooting a bit more homogeneous. We are not looking at multiple platforms and monitoring management tools. It is more efficient from that perspective. It is more of a common monitoring and control system for multiple aspects of what used to be different systems. It provides efficiency and time savings."
"It has a unique approach to packet processing. It has single-pass architecture. We can easily perform policy lookups, application decoding, and integration or merging. This can be all done with a single pass. It effectively reduces the amount of processing required to perform multiple actions. This is the main advantage of using Palo Alto."
"It has a solid network security with some robust tools. We can block unexpected attacks, especially zero-day attacks. Since they use the Pan-OS engine, they can collect attacks from all over the world and analyze them. They can then protect against zero-day attacks and unexpected attacks."
"They have a good system operator in the firewalls and it provides many tools that they can use to protect their networks."
"In my opinion, Palo Alto has consistently been one of the best firewalls for enterprise security."
"Currently, FortiGate is providing SSL VPN. But they're missing some features that are available in Palo Alto's SSL VPN."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"I would like to see improvements in the support from Fortinet. Here in the Philippines, whenever we have problems with a Fortinet product, we mostly ask for support from distributors and resellers and not directly from Fortinet."
"Tunnel flapping was one of the major things I had seen wherein your internet link remains but your VPN tunnel is down. However, since I got a fix from the TAC team, I have not noticed it, but the customer complained a few times that they couldn't access the internet because of this problem."
"With the reports, you can see it, and you can get good feelings so upper management can go, "Oh, wow. That looks pretty." However, it's very basic."
"Sometimes you do need to know some CLI commands, so it's a bit harder for technicians or new people that don't know it."
"Backup can be improved."
"The solution needs to add an antivirus profile and anti-spyware profile, not just policies and VPN."
"They should provide more details on potential cyber threats."
"While they offer a comprehensive bundled solution, some users may prefer on-premise deployments for certain features, such as URL filtering."
"It's a complicated firewall. Until you come to know the firewall inducers, most people don't like the firewall because the components for the firewall are a little bit complex. User-friendliness is a little bit tough. It needs to be user-friendly when creating policies, and pushing policies. Committing takes more time compared to Palo Alto."
"The network interface could be better, and it could be cheaper."
"Something that I've noticed that Forcepoint lacks, is the training that they offer to their end-customers"
"My team is looking for more throughput and better integration with our security framework."
"Configuration is not easy because it has an old-fashioned interface. The configuration interface is highly complex, and it's been the same for years. They have to change the interface."
"I would like more reporting and metrics in the solution."
"They can improve the handling and management of User-ID. They should also improve its price. Their technical support can also be improved."
"I would like them to bring in some features that would encourage traffic shaping or bandwidth routing, like other UTM firewalls, because the solution should be capable of limiting the bandwidth for rules."
"I wish that the Palos had better system logging for the hardware itself."
"Palo Alto keeps coming out with antivirus and malware updates. When we have to integrate those updates we face some problems with the cloud platform, not the on-prem setup. The device works fine, but sometimes the sync doesn't happen on time."
"The analytics could be improved."
"Its price can be improved. It is expensive. Other vendors have pre-configured policies for the protection of web servers. Palo Alto has an official procedure for protecting the web servers. Many people prefer pre-configured policies, but for me, it is not an issue."
"Palo Alto can do a little bit better when it comes to the User-ID part. I've been facing problems related to double authentication. You have a computer user, but you also have a VPN user, and when you do a single sign-on to another page, these logs can sometimes generate a problem notification. It doesn't happen a lot, but in some networks, it could be a problem. It would be very helpful to have the ability to restrict the connections that you can have in your VPN. For example, if you have the credentials, you can connect with the same user account from different computers or devices. If you have the domain information, you can connect from different devices. That's a problem that they need to address and resolve. They should ensure that at any moment, only one person is connected through a specific user account."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 40 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 162 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Cisco Secure Firewall and Sophos XG, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
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.
