Compare Arbor DDoS vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire

Arbor DDoS is ranked 1st in DDoS with 15 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 2nd in Advanced Threat Protection with 9 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "Our customers can check how many attacks they have faced and how many have been blocked". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Traffic is scanned in a single flow which improves the response times for the user". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare and FortiDDoS, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW and Cisco ASA NGFW.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Arbor Networks, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in DDoS. Updated: September 2019.
366,756 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
We can reduce the bandwidth to minimize the attack level. If we see more than 2.5 GBs we drop it directly.In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address.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.Valuable features include simple and centralized management of user access and capabilities, as well as Web 2.0 interactive attack alerting, traffic visualization, and mitigation service control.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.There are a number of valuable features in this product, like Cloud Signaling and Threat Intelligence feeds.Arbor has a global ranking in reliability and credibility. They are very unique and can respond to a very wide scope of threats from their global deployment.It's just one dashboard with mitigation. You decide which mitigation you want and at what threshold to do this or that. Its operation is pretty simple. It's easy.

Read more »

The most valuable feature is the Automatic Verdict, to recognize whether something is a threat, or not.They have many different options with Palo Alto WildFire and the set-up is quick. If you have all the details in hand, it does not take more than 15 minutes to deploy a firewall.It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN.Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides.It is stable and pretty much scalable.The cloud-based services are a nice feature.My primary use case for this solution is for a secure gateway.The reporting feature helps our performance.

Read more »

Cons
If we want to see live traffic, we can see do so. But once an attack that lasts for five minutes is done, the data is no longer there. It would be an improvement if we could see recent traffic in the dashboard. We can check and download live traffic, but a past attack, with all the details, such as why it happened and how to mitigate and prevent such future attacks, would be helpful to see.There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations.On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved.The following areas need improvement: opening and tracking support tickets, online support resources, software upgrades/updates and replacement media, and event management guidelines.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.Sometimes it blocks legitimate traffic. If a legitimate user is trying to access the server continuously, the product suspects that this is a DoS traffic file. That is a case where it needs to improve. It needs machine-learning.I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions.For troubleshooting problems, it's not so intuitive. It's not straightforward. This is the core of their kernel, so they need to improve it a little bit... In F5 I have full control of everything.

Read more »

I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product.There are certain changes that I was expecting in the previous version, and I hope that they are soon fixed. All of the problems that I have faced so far have been resolved.Other vendors have some sort of bandwidth management built into the firewall itself and Palo Alto is missing that.As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity.The initial setup was complex.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.I would give this product a rating of 9 out of 10 due to some slight issues of performance.They should make their user interface a little more user-friendly.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Pricing is slightly on the higher side.I'm a technical guy. But I know it's expensive compared to its competitors. After you have the on-premise solution, for your solution to be effective you have to subscribe to an "upper level," so there's another cost. There is also a subscription to cloud services, which is another cost.Arbor's products are very expensive. Their competitors are cheap when compared with Arbor.As far as I know, they are the best in this sector, in DDoS protection. They know it, I know, because their service prices are too high. They provide cloud DDoS protection for ISPs, but that is also too expensive.Because the solutions from competitors are very different, it's not easy to compare. However, the licensing from Arbor is clear and understandable and the pricing is reasonable when looking at the market, in general.

Read more »

The licensing fees are on an annual basis, and there are no costs in addition to the standard fees.It's pretty expensive but with respect to value for money, it's okay.It is a reasonable price compared to other solutions on the market.The pricing is OK, it is not too expensive.​More expensive than other firewalls.​It is expensive, a feature more accessible to enterprise class customers, but provides an enhanced possibility that Zero- or near-Zero-day threats may be identified and mitigated. The cost of the product weighed against the potential impact of even one successful crypto malware-type exploit may justify the expense.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DDoS solutions are best for your needs.
366,756 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
out of 28 in DDoS
Views
10,694
Comparisons
6,773
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
601
Avg. Rating
8.3
Views
45,012
Comparisons
36,633
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
386
Avg. Rating
8.9
Top Comparisons
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
Arbor Networks SP, Arbor Networks TMS, Arbor Cloud for ENT
Learn
Arbor Networks
Palo Alto Networks
Overview
Arbor Networks, the security division of NETSCOUT, is driven to protect the infrastructure and ecosystem of the internet. It is the principle upon which we were founded in 2000; and remains the common thread that runs through all that we do today. Arbor’s approach is rooted in the study of network traffic. Arbor’s suite of visibility, DDoS protection and advanced threat solutions provide customers with a micro view of their network enhanced by a macro view of global internet traffic and emerging threats through our ATLAS infrastructure. Sourced from more than 300 service provider customers, ATLAS delivers intelligence based on insight into approximately 1/3 of global internet traffic. Supported by Arbor’s Security Engineering & Response Team (ASERT), smart workflows and rich user context, Arbor’s network insights help customers see, understand and solve the most complex and consequential security challenges facing their organizations. WildFire™ cloud-based threat analysis service is the industry’s most advanced analysis and prevention engine for highly evasive zero-day exploits and malware. The cloud-based service employs a unique multi-technique approach combining dynamic and static analysis, innovative machine learning techniques, and a groundbreaking bare metal analysis environment to detect and prevent even the most evasive threats.
Offer
Under Attack?

Learn More About Arbor DDoS

Learn more about Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Sample Customers
Information Not Available
Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider86%
Financial Services Firm14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider33%
Software R&D Company17%
Retailer9%
University5%
REVIEWERS
Government29%
Media Company14%
Financial Services Firm14%
Energy/Utilities Company14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company21%
Comms Service Provider13%
Manufacturing Company9%
Media Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business30%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise57%
REVIEWERS
Small Business52%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise38%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business24%
Midsize Enterprise38%
Large Enterprise38%
Find out what your peers are saying about Arbor Networks, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in DDoS. Updated: September 2019.
366,756 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all DDoS 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.
Sign Up with Email