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."We have taken on the Arbor Cloud subscription, which is really useful because you secure yourself for anything beyond your current mitigation capacity. This is a really good feature of Arbor that is available."
"I like all the features together as a whole."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Predefined filters/techniques to easily stop the attacks and start mitigation."
"Arbor DDoS offers security features that automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks."
"We are able to respond quickly and prevent DDoS attacks."
"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."
"It's very flexible and we can easily deploy it to our network. It's very user-friendly. We can do everything via the web interface and troubleshoot easily from the CLI. It's not complicated."
"It is stable and pretty much scalable."
"Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides."
"It catches modified signatures of known viruses."
"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."
"Scalable ATP solution that's quick to set up. It demonstrates good performance and stability."
"The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the Automatic Verdict, to recognize whether something is a threat, or not."
"Remote access is excellent."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"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."
"There is some room for AI to take place."
"A small improvement could be a better reporting system."
"The upgrade process is mildly complex requiring treatment of the custom embedded OS separately from the application. The correlation of the underling OS to the application version can be easily missed."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels."
"It is an expensive product, so there is room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"The free version does not have real-time updates. It is slow."
"It would be nice if there was an easier way to install and deploy it, such as through the inclusion of wizards."
"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."
"I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"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 support is good but they could be faster."
"Any enhancements should likely be focused on the firewall appliance to further strengthen overall security capabilities, such as refining app and user identity features."
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.