We performed a comparison between Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Darktrace, Vectra AI, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)."Solid intrusion detection and prevention that scales easily in very large environments."
"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is easy to configure and the reporting is great. It's also very user-friendly."
"The URL filtering is very good and you can create a group for customized URLs."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility that we have across the virtual environment."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"Cisco technical support is unbeatable. It offers a premium service every time."
"It has a huge rate of protection. It's has a low level of positives and a huge rate of threat protection. It's easy to deploy and easy to implement. It has an incredible price rate compared to similar solutions."
"Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is easy to use, easy to operate, and easy to edit."
"The Palo Alto solution has improved our organization by providing threat protection across a variety of internet connections. Our company also gets valuable insights regarding threat analysis."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The most valuable feature is that the product can do everything in a single device, including the firewall, rules, and the PBL. It also has good routing and switching."
"It's allowed us to have better visibility and protection from threats."
"Prohibited URLs can be listed by category."
"Being able to manage blacklists and whitelists easily is very useful, especially for internal access and limiting outbound access."
"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."
"I did not experience any pain points that required improvement. Maybe a couple of false-positives, but that's about it."
"The pricing needs to be improved. We have lots of low-budget clients around us. Budget constraints are always a deterrent in our market."
"To be frank, the product is not really stable, although they're working on that. Whenever I go to the technical community with an issue, they will usually say that it is not there yet, but the technical team are working on it. The issues are not insolvable. I think they should just keep working on the product to make sure that the product can become very stable. The technical support is great. I appreciate that. We have a lot of communities supporting Firepower now, so you can find help for whatever issue you have."
"While the alerts they offer are good, it could improve it in the sense that they should be more detailed to make the alerts more useful to us in general. Sometimes the solution will offer up false positives. Due to the fact that the alerts aren't detailed, we have to go dig around to see why is it being blocked. The solution would be infinitely better if there was just a bit more detail in the alert information and logging we receive."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"The cloud can be improved."
"The solution's approach to managing traffic blocking is confusing and impractical."
"We have had some challenges with making Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB work with ELK stack."
"An area for improvement would be the technical support, which can be slow."
"For hosting sites like Blogspot, they host sites that should be in different categories, but get lumped together in general. There needs to be more granularity or multiple categorizations."
"One way Palo Alto can improve is by offering sandboxing. I don't know if they currently offer a sandboxing feature together with the firewall or not. They should provide secure sandboxing with the firewalls."
"Performance monitoring could use improvement."
"It is an expensive solution and not everyone has the budget for it."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
More Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 13th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 18 reviews while Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is ranked 18th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS). Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "An IPS solution for security and protection but lacks stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB writes "Provides regular updates with an auto download option; prohibited URLs can be listed by category ". Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Trellix Intrusion Prevention System, whereas Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is most compared with Check Point IPS, Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Zscaler Cloud IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.