We performed a comparison between Barracuda CloudGen Firewall 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 solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"There are great templates, so you don't have to customize them if you don't want to. You do have the option to custom create some folders and some reports, however, with what is there, you don't really need to go through extra effort, as they already give you a lot of predefined views of reports and so forth."
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"The most valuable features are that it is very simple to configure and to manage."
"The integration with Active Directory is one of the good features. Most of the customers are now looking for the Single Sign-on feature. So, being able to integrate Active Directory with the firewall is useful. It is also easy."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a scalable solution."
"Its stability and SD-WAN features are the most valuable."
"I would most definitely recommend this solution to other people."
"The solution is stable."
"Single device, multiple functions - I do not need to purchase a web application firewall, a proxy server, a VPN device and so many others because these are all built in to this one device."
"It's great for handling complex items."
"It is a very stable solution."
"We use Barracuda NG Firewall as a border firewall. We trough it to control all in/out Internet traffic."
"Enables us to define user application-level access, so our customers can work anytime from anywhere."
"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."
"It has a user-friendly interface."
"Stability is never a concern."
"WildFire's application encryption is useful."
"The technical support is good."
"You have better control because you define apps. You just don't define ports. You define apps, and the apps are monitored in the traffic. It is more specific than the Cisco firewall when it comes to our needs."
"I like the analysis they apply to the unknown files, and I think they have good technology to use as a sandboxing tool. I didn't find something similar to WildFire in the marketplace."
"Remote access is excellent."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"It should be more stable. There should be full integration within Fortinet products themselves as well as with other third-party products. Especially when you're not dealing with SIEM and the correlation of the security box, we want Fortinet to be able to share that information with as many other products as it can."
"It could use more templates for third-party site-to-site VPN setups other than FortiGate and Cisco."
"The Web-filter in this solution is not very good."
"Its filtering is sometimes too precise or strict. We sometimes have to bypass and authorize some of the sites, but they get blocked. We know that they are trusted sites, but they are blocked, and we don't know why."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"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."
"I would like to see the connection improved."
"Barracuda CloudGen Firewall should work a little bit more with the logs so that, in our company, we can generate a little bit more reports and get a bit more statistics, which would be fine for us."
"The features are a bit limited compared to other vendors."
"The administration UI could be better. It should also have better application detection policies."
"Technical support used to be at a very high level but it is now a bit less so."
"The interface should be more user-friendly and it should be easier to configure."
"We would like to see a solution that is focused on container deployment, which is very important right now."
"There is room for improvement in performance and the support language. The support they're providing right now is from a different country, and in our country, there are people—network admins and IT heads—who don't speak English properly. So Barracuda needs to provide support agents who speak additional languages, such as Bangla."
"The system performance degrades after the solution has been deployed for some time. The data that it gives us becomes a little bit slow. When you try to get some data for troubleshooting, it seems like it's working hard to extract that data."
"There are certain changes that I was expecting in the previous version, and I hope that they are soon fixed. All of the problems that I have faced so far have been resolved."
"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."
"There are some formats that the solution cannot support ."
"The threat intelligence that we receiving in the reporting was not as expected. We were expecting more. Additionally, we should be able to whitelist a specific file based on a variety of attributes."
"The support is good but they could be faster."
"High availability features are lacking."
"The automation and responsiveness need improvement."
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 35 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in ATP (Advanced Threat Protection) with 58 reviews. Barracuda CloudGen Firewall is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Barracuda CloudGen Firewall writes "Feature-rich, robust, and easy to set up". 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". Barracuda CloudGen Firewall is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos UTM and Meraki MX, 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.