Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention Review

User-friendly, offers interesting features, has good URL filtering, and good threat prevention

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use cases for this solution is content fileting and threat prevention. 

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are that it's:

  • User-friendly 
  • Has interesting features 
  • URL filtering 
  • Threat prevention. 

What needs improvement?

We use four Palo Alto solutions in stand-alone mode and but it's hard to use when I use it in Panorama. Palo Alto's maintenance needs to be improved. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for a year and a half. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto is quite stable. It's better than Cisco. We've had many issues with Cisco and experienced many bugs. 

How are customer service and technical support?

We've contacted customer support. I would rate them a six out of ten. 

How was the initial setup?

The deployment was straightforward. It wasn't difficult for us. 

What about the implementation team?

We used a consultant for the deployment. They helped us to deploy the device. We were satisfied with their service. It's not as good as Cisco support. 

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution. It's stable and doesn't have many bugs. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

In order to make it a ten, they should improve their technical support. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
More Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention reviews from users
...who compared it with Cisco NGIPS
Add a Comment