FireMon Security Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

FireMon Security Manager
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Firewall Security Management category, the market share of FireMon Security Manager is 15.9% and it decreased by 12.6% compared to the previous year. The market share of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.5% and it decreased by 19.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

ET
Jul 7, 2022
We have been able to meet our compliance risk management targets
When it comes to real-time compliance management, it is very good because it is able to compare changes in the configuration as well as giving us a timestamp. It also sends email alerts to our environment so we know if someone has made a change on the network. It gives us the whole picture of that change. Whether it is a configuration change or just a small comment, it gives us the before and after snapshot. FireMon can see firewall rules that may be too open. Then, we need to make them more restrictive. This is extremely important for our security posture. Every minute that passes, where we are not aware of an exposure, could cause major damage to the company.
MS
Aug 26, 2019
Improves management abilities by simplifying the implementation of policies for all branches
The minimum license is for 25 users, so up until now, I didn't need to scale. We currently have five or six users who work on the program daily, and most of them are in the security division. One person is using Panorama to check for the logs from the files, and then we have a security consultant. We have one or two staff responsible for maintenance. We used three people for deployment, as we were already using some of them for the branches, creating a VPN between AWS and to create firewalls to ensure that everything was working fast.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I like the Security Manager console where we can see any changes that have been made or pull the results of an assessment and control the policies that we implement."
"The most valuable feature is that everything is recorded in the historical logs, including the firewall rules, headcounts, object-level usage, and the rule documentation. The rule certification details are also there, which means that someone can be held accountable for a specific firewall rule."
"It is a good product. Previously, we were using only spreadsheets to compare the usage, but now with FireMon, we are able to clean up or review the policies to some extent. It is still a work in progress, but we are at a good stage now."
"When it comes to real-time compliance management, it is very good because it is able to compare changes in the configuration as well as giving us a timestamp. It also sends email alerts to our environment so we know if someone has made a change on the network. It gives us the whole picture of that change. Whether it is a configuration change or just a small comment, it gives us the before and after snapshot."
"I've been using the reports to see what is going on, and that is a helpful feature. We can track down unused rules, which helps with compliance. We can see rules that have not been used or that are duplicates or overly permissive."
"The unused objects is another nice feature, where it digs a little bit deeper into comparing the logs that it sees versus the configurations that it sees... The unused objects feature will go through in a pretty detailed way and show us which ones aren't being used. Or, if they are used, it will show us how often they're used."
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. There are a lot of products out there, but the ability to navigate through and use Firemon is very good."
"Firewall auditing is very important. We also use the solution for rule traffic analysis, traffic flow discovery and hidden/shadow rules within over 100 firewalls spanning five different brands."
"It allows administrators to manage all firewalls from a single interface, reducing the time and effort required for configuration."
"In Panorama, installing the policy, and pushing the policy, it's quite seamless."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the simplicity of rule management. Both this device group and template management are very easy to use."
"The application ID or App-ID feature is a good feature for us. We are also using IPS and content inspection features. The firewall can inspect the packages that are passing through my network."
"The compliance features are very effective at identifying things that need to be properly hardened."
"The solution is easy to use."
"On the one or two occasions that I had to make use of technical support, I felt it to be pretty good."
"The solution doesn't need a proxy for the Prisma Access Firewall."
 

Cons

"I ran a report and FireMon suggested that certain tools were not used. When I removed them, while it didn't bring our environment down completely, a lot of our environment started malfunctioning. Our backup system did not work, nor did other things that involve internal and external communication. We are not comfortable with what it did."
"FireMon could be easier to use and flexibility regarding reporting could be improved."
"The AWS integration is still not mature for us to use. It is just not ready for our use case for AWS connectivity. Therefore, it does not provide us with a single pane of glass for our cloud environments, because we can't manage our cloud environment with the tool."
"When it comes to documentation, they need to start putting together a basic command manual. With Cisco, you can look up a command and it gives you examples of three or four different ways that command can be used. It tells you how to put it into the GUI and the CLI. FireMon does need to start doing that."
"FireMon could be made more user-friendly when it comes to creating filters or conducting traffic analysis."
"Policy Planner requirements section is good, but could use some improvement to allow flexibility to enter different types of requests (modifying an existing policy, object or service group, for example) in a structured task format that can be auto-verified."
"I think that having a more open system and providing documentation for it would be helpful for users like us. We are pretty adept and can navigate through the Linux software that the on-premises FireMon is based on. It would help us in the long run."
"The cost of the solution is pretty expensive. It would be ideal if they could work on their pricing."
"The dual WAN functionality is missing in this solution."
"I would like to have better analytics."
"At times we have noticed that we get into issues where Panorama is going too slow or has other little problems. The performance can suffer occasionally."
"The product does need a bit of configuration. It's not quite ready to go out of the box."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be better."
"Aside from pricing, I don't have any issues with Panorama."
"Panorama needs to work on its configuration issues."
"There is room for improvement in response time for tech support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is reasonable."
"The pricing was very good during our initial year, but they increased it this year a little bit. The price is okay. It is not cheap, but it is still average."
"Pricing model seems fair."
"FireMon is very expensive. I think that they charge a premium. In general, they are very pricey. Compared to their competitors, they cost a little more than the other solutions that we evaluated."
"The pricing is very good, very straightforward. It also came in cheaper than AlgoSec and Tufin."
"We don't license all of the devices in our network, so it does not provide us with a comprehensive visibility of all devices in a hybrid network at this time."
"Relative to what it offers, the price is fair."
"FireMon is cheaper than AlgoSec."
"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."
"It is not a cheap solution."
"If I were to rate the pricing of Palo on a scale of one to five, with one being really high and five being a good, reasonable price, I would rate Palo as a three."
"Sometimes the company prefers to give a license to test the product in our environment before we go to the customer. But the customer should buy his own license, and that's the system here. The system is different between one country and another. Some countries say that the IT solutions provider should provide the license."
"The solution is expensive and could be cheaper."
"The pricing model is reasonable for this class of solutions."
"The pricing is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"The price of the licenses could be lower. Still, because we have Panorama with 25 firewalls, Palo Alto gives us a good discount."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
787,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about FireMon?
I like the Security Manager console where we can see any changes that have been made or pull the results of an assessment and control the policies that we implement.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireMon?
It's a good value. From a licensing standpoint, our only limitation is the number of devices that we manage. Our environment is small. We have fewer than 20 enterprise firewalls, meaning it's hard ...
What needs improvement with FireMon?
We've had recurring issues managing FireMon's internal backups. Sometimes, the space allocated for the backup is full, and there is no process where it deletes files that are older than I certain d...
What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
The most valuable aspect of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for me is the centralized management of multiple firewalls.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
Palo Alto is costly compared to Fortinet and Sophos. However, the vendor is working on cost-effective models. They are working on the back end to make it more attractive for SMBs.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
If we implement Cisco or Fortinet's firewall for the first time, anybody with a basic knowledge of firewalls can set the policies and rules. The implementation is not that easy. Though Palo Alto is...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Convey, MGM Resorts International, Southwest Airlines, Alkami, Costco, Aetna, IBM, Verizon, Wells Fargo
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about FireMon Security Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.