We performed a comparison between NetWitness Platform and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."NetWitness Platform is valuable for creating rules that the solution must detect."
"In my opinion, the solution's most valuable feature is its capacity to monitor network traffic, logs from devices within the network, and network captures. This capability extends beyond logs to include full network capturing."
"The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult."
"Setting up NetWitness is straightforward. There are multiple connectors, including standard and specialized connectors. One purpose of the connectors is the enhanced capability integrate the custom applications. NetWitness comes with E6 appliances and application images that we use for the initial configurations and for the OS stack information. From there, you can consider the correlation rules, integrate the different log sources, and easily create correlation rules and backlog reports."
"It gives the ability to investigate into network traffic in the Net and the organization what we couldn't do before."
"What we are mainly using are the RSA concentrator, RSA Decoder, Archiver, Broker, and Log Decoder."
"The packet capture aspect of it is a valuable feature because it is quite different from a traditional SIEM solution that only carries out investigations based on captured logs."
"The most valuable feature is that we can create our own connectors for any application, and NetWitness provides the training and tools to do it."
"I give the initial setup an eight out of ten."
"The analysis is very fast."
"The most valuable features of this solution are sandbox capabilities."
"We have found that Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable. We currently have six thousand users for the product."
"It catches modified signatures of known viruses."
"The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall."
"The cloud-based services are a nice feature."
"Intuitive threat prevention and analysis solution, with a machine learning feature. Scalable, stable, and protects against zero-day threats."
"The initial setup is complex. There are other solutions that are easier to implement."
"The system looks like it is a mix of a bunch of different systems, and nothing looked like it was quite together."
"The threat detection capability and centralizing and upgrading capability need to be improved. The threat alert capability needs to be improved as well because there is some lag time at present. They need to work on their database search too."
"The user interface is a little bit difficult for new users and it needs to be improved."
"The product's licensing models are complex to understand. This particular area needs improvement."
"The documentation is not as structured as I would like, personally, and I think that it can be improved and made much more user-friendly."
"The initial setup is very complex and should be simplified."
"Lots of competing products have vulnerability protection built into their products, and this solution would be improved by including that support."
"When you contact support, there is no guarantee that they will be available to help you tackle the issue that you are facing."
"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."
"The initial setup was a little bit complex, mainly due to the GUI console and management challenges."
"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."
"They should make their user interface a little more user-friendly."
"Other vendors have some sort of bandwidth management built into the firewall itself and Palo Alto is missing that."
"The cost of this solution could still be improved, in particular, giving product discounts for charitable causes."
NetWitness Platform is ranked 19th in Log Management with 36 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". 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". NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Microsoft Sentinel, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection and Fortinet FortiSandbox. See our NetWitness Platform vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire report.
We monitor all Log 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.