We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks WildFire and Sophos UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, ESET and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)."The most valuable feature is the cloud-based protection against zero-day malware attacks."
"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 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 is stable and pretty much scalable."
"WildFire's application encryption is useful."
"A good tool for file scanning and email threat detection, especially when it comes to attachments and communications."
"The most valuable feature for us is the VPN."
"With this product, we receive the best monitoring and reports."
"The solution is easy to handle and configure."
"It helped to connect our satellite offices to the main Amazon infrastructure in a circular way."
"The most valuable feature is that it is easy to administer."
"It is a stable product... I rate the solution's technical support a nine out of ten...The initial setup is quite easy because they have all the information on their website."
"It allows our developers to be able to securely log into servers to deploy and manage software."
"The solution can scale."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The initial setup is easy."
"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 product's false positive logs could be more user-friendly to understand. They could provide examples of precious cases to learn."
"There are some formats that the solution cannot support ."
"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."
"Many years back an update caused an issue with the firewall. However, Palo Alto not only informed us of said issue, they also sent an update that fixed the issue before I even had time to log in to determine if the issue affected our services."
"As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity."
"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."
"The configuration should be made a little bit easier. I understand why it is as it is, but there should be a way to make it easier from the user side."
"Sophos should be more user-friendly, have more dashboards, and an easier implementation."
"Reporting: We have had to work manually in many of our reports."
"Needs to improve the certificate management (ex. Let's Encrypt support)."
"The product could be simplified and made more self-explanatory."
"The logs are not clear, which means that you need an additional piece of software in order to read them clearly."
"The documentation during the AWS integration was a little fuzzy on getting it to work with how the whole public exposure versus private exposure, then routing some of the traffic."
"Sophos UTM sometimes falls short in high-availability environments. They used to launch firmware that didn't work very well in a high-availability environment."
"Finding information about Sophos’ sizing guidelines can actually be difficult. Also, Sophos does not make it clear what they mean by “users” when you are sizing a firewall, which then leads to undersized implementations."
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews. Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Proofpoint Email Protection, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Fortinet FortiSandbox, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.