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 graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure."
"It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN."
"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."
"It is the best device in comparison to other network products in the marketplace."
"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."
"The solution has plenty of features."
"The technical support is good."
"Detailed reporting on analysis of content. The inspections are easily applied to security policy profiles and profile groups, and may be assigned on a per-rule basis."
"With Sophos, we have not had any incidents this year. The security provided has been good. It has proven to be okay for our needs."
"It has made our organization more secure, because we are using a VPN. We are not accessing services directly. It allows us to segregate some of the traffic for individuals which may be more of a developer role rather than an operational role needing access to developer resources, but not necessarily production operational resources."
"The firewall itself is very strong and provides great security."
"The initial configuration is straightforward thanks to the web GUI. In 30 minutes, you can have a running firewall with UTM protection enabled."
"Configuration could not be made any easier."
"The solution is easy to handle and configure."
"So far, the solution has been problem-free."
"Configuration troubleshooting is eased by the use of the color-coded, live firewall log."
"When you contact support, there is no guarantee that they will be available to help you tackle the issue that you are facing."
"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 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."
"The initial setup was complex."
"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."
"When comparing this solution to others it is not as good overall."
"I would give this product a rating of 9 out of 10 due to some slight issues of performance."
"High availability features are lacking."
"Sophos UTM's internet security could be better."
"Sophos should be more user-friendly, have more dashboards, and an easier implementation."
"They could definitely improve on the support, especially in other countries."
"The solution needs to do better at covering mobile devices, although they may have an integrated solution for that purpose."
"In Sophos UTM there is always a problem with the routing tables. If you want to see the routing table, you have to use the UI. You can't do it via a web browser. The routing table is better in Fortinet."
"The application control is really bad. It needs a lot of enhancements. The traffic shaping and bandwidth control, and application control need a lot of work."
"The solution's technical support for India needs to be improved."
"We need to speed up the support."
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.