We performed a comparison between AlgoSec and Palo Alto Networks Panorama based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."ABF is application-centric. which helps to track changes in the application from day one."
"It offers a range of automated workflows and processes that accelerate security policy management."
"Firewall Analyzer and AppViz are the most important features because they provide a lot of information regarding network segmentation. For us, this is a valuable input in order to provide network segmentation for various applications that we have developed in-house or that we bought from vendors. Our network is not properly segmented right now, but we plan to do it using AlgoSec. This is the most important feature for us right now."
"It gives control and visibility to the end users."
"Proactively assess the impact of network changes to ensure security and continuous compliance."
"AlgoSec Firewall Analyser improves the firewall rules dramatically by identifying rules and objects that are not needed and consolidates rules and rule re-ordering."
"Being able to analyze the environment and audit firewall configuration is most valuable. We are working here in the oil sector, and it's a critical environment. Every six months we have auditors coming from the main office and doing auditing for security. We are using AlgoSec Analyzer to help us to do the audit before the auditors come to our office and do the auditing of our security devices. So, it's helping us to do good work and analyze all security devices, including firewalls."
"The features that are most valuable are the interactive topology map and the traffic simulation queries."
"Compared to all of the other firewall vendors, Palo Alto is very secure."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Firewalls: The application ID capabilities have been very useful for things like Active Directory, and not having to identify every port that Microsoft has decided to use."
"The product can scale."
"One valuable feature is centralized management. We are able to manage it centrally for two to three remote offices, our head office and our data centers. So, it is very simple to manage."
"What I like most about this solution is that it allows me to push multiple policies on multiple followers at the same time."
"Networks Panorama has improved our organizational security"
"It provides a quicker response time to vulnerabilities and more visibility into traffic flows."
"I would like to see more object-based reports on groups and object usage."
"The process to replace a decommissioned device with a new device is not straightforward."
"I would like to see enhanced dashboards or build meaningful reports for executive consumption."
"The initial setup can be complex for beginners."
"The user interface could be a little more user-friendly."
"We needs object level permissions and application level recertifications."
"Default standard support at Level 1 is to answer by upgrading to the latest released version, if you are not using it yet."
"Some UI experience is a little clunky (for e.g. MAPS module) and could be made more user-friendly."
"They need to do less bug-related releases and create versions that are stable for at least six months at a time. I don't find this issue in other solutions like Cisco, Check Point, FortiGate, or others. Those just provide a patch if there is a bug and we don't have to worry about downtime."
"We had some challenges with the initial setup, but it was more on a learning curve basis."
"There is always room for improvement in anything."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"It would be beneficial to improve the capabilities of Panorama to handle logs more efficiently, potentially reducing the need for additional local collectors. Adding more predefined dashboards as features would enhance the monitoring and reporting capabilities."
"The solution's utilization of network ports makes things as complex as possible."
"It communicates with remote devices, and sometimes, there is a little bit of delay during its communication with remote devices. There should be real-time communication or updates from the manager to devices."
"It is very hard to understand the platform. It is not easy and user-friendly. You need a lot of experience to use Panorama. It is very complex, and you must know exactly what to do. I would like to have a more user-friendly product. FortiManager is comparatively very easy to use. It would be good if Panorama improves in terms of user-friendliness. It is also harder to use than Palo Alto Firewalls."
AlgoSec is ranked 1st in Firewall Security Management with 173 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is ranked 3rd in Firewall Security Management with 81 reviews. AlgoSec is rated 9.0, while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AlgoSec writes "Helps identify risks, reduce attack surfaces, and streamline policy changes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama writes "Built-in proxy with the ability to maintain your own policies". AlgoSec is most compared with Tufin Orchestration Suite, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Fortinet FortiManager, whereas Palo Alto Networks Panorama is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, Tufin Orchestration Suite, FireMon Security Manager and Skybox Security Suite. See our AlgoSec vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.