We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, NETSCOUT, Akamai and others in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection."Companies that live from their presence on the internet will get a very high return on investment from Arbor."
"Our customers are very happy when we provide them with the interface... They can check how many attacks they have faced and how many attacks have been blocked."
"Predefined filters/techniques to easily stop the attacks and start mitigation."
"The stateless device format means that the box is very strong for preventing DDoS attacks."
"We use it not only for DDoS detection and protection, but we also use it for traffic analysis and capacity planning as well. We've also been able to extend the use of it to other security measures within our company, the front-line defense, not only for DDoS, but for any kind of scanning malware that may be picked up. It's also used for outbound attacks, which has helped us mitigate those and lower our bandwidth costs..."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"There are a number of valuable features in this product, like Cloud Signaling and Threat Intelligence feeds."
"It provides packet capture and we can block or whitelist whichever IPs we need to. Whatever traffic we want to block - and we get IPs from internal teams and from national teams - we block at the Arbor level only, because if it gets to the firewall then firewall bandwidth will be taken."
"My primary use case for this solution is for a secure gateway."
"WildFire's application encryption is useful."
"Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones has improved my organization."
"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."
"Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides."
"The most valuable feature is the cloud-based protection against zero-day malware attacks."
"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."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"Implementation could be better."
"There is some room for AI to take place."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"The regional support here in African could improve, such as marketing and account managers."
"On the application layer, they could have a better distributed traffic flow. They could improve that a bit. For network data it is very effective, but the application layer can be improved."
"The solution needs to enhance its features to compete with other tools."
"Arbor's SSL decryption is confusing and needs external cards to be installed in the devices. This is not the best solution from an architectural point of view for protecting HTTPS and every other protocol that is SSL encrypted."
"The price of WildFire should be reduced in order to make it more affordable for our customers."
"The automation and responsiveness need improvement."
"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."
"There are more specialized solutions that compete with Wildfire. Therefore, they need to work on their machine learning and AI to be more competitive."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"It's not really their problem, it's a problem across the board. There will always be problems with interrupted traffic. We have to set it up where we're playing a middle man game where we're stripping it out, looking at it, and then putting it back together and sending it on its way. That requires CPU cycles. And there's some overhead with that."
"The global product feature needs improvement, the VPN, and we need some enhanced features."
"The product fails to offer protection when dealing with high-severity vulnerabilities, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". 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". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and Azure DDoS Protection, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection and Trellix Network Detection and Response.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.