Arunkumar VaidynathanAssistant Consultant at Tata Consultancy
JamesJiangIT Security Analyst at a energy/utilities company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"The solution is very stable. It's reliable. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. It works as expected."
"The product features allow the capacity to take effective, advanced security measures."
"Centralized management is a valuable feature."
"Our team has the option to make configuration changes at any given time."
"Palo Alto technical support is excellent."
"The compliance features are very effective at identifying things that need to be properly hardened."
"Networks Panorama has improved our organizational security"
"You don't need an overly experienced workforce to handle Palo Alto. It's very easy to use."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."
"The solution should improve the speed at which they make changes on the system. Historically, they've been a bit slow in that respect. They should apply changes to the box quicker and more often."
"The product could use some method of allowing for more customization and open integration with other controls."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"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."
"This would be a better solution if it were more tightly integrated with the firewalls."
"They need to do less bug-related releases and create versions that are stable for at least six months at a time. I don't find this issue in other solutions like Cisco, Check Point, FortiGate, or others. Those just provide a patch if there is a bug and we don't have to worry about downtime."
"I would like to have better analytics."
"It should have more connection with Threat Intelligence Cloud. They can also include features related to SecOps and automation API."
"The solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"We pay approximately $3,000 a year in order to use the product."
"The pricing model is reasonable for this class of solutions."
"Palo Alto is expensive and there are many cheaper firewalls, but they do not work as well."
"It is not a cheap solution."
"The price of Panorama is expensive."
"The solution is priced well and there is a license for this solution that we pay annually for."
"We have a yearly license. The cost is not that high and not that cheap either."
"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."
Azure Firewall Manager is a security management service that provides central security policy and route management for cloud-based security perimeters.
Panorama network security management provides static rules and dynamic security updates in an ever-changing threat landscape. Reduce administrator workload and improve your overall security posture with a single rule base for firewall, threat prevention, URL filtering, application awareness, user identification, file blocking and data filtering.
Azure Firewall Manager is ranked 9th in Firewall Security Management with 2 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is ranked 3rd in Firewall Security Management with 32 reviews. Azure Firewall Manager is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall Manager writes "Reasonably priced and scaled well but needs reverse NAT-ing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama writes "Easy to manage with a straightforward initial setup and good stability". Azure Firewall Manager is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, Skybox Security Suite and Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, whereas Palo Alto Networks Panorama is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, AlgoSec, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, Tufin and Cisco Defense Orchestrator. See our Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security 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.