We performed a comparison between CloudPassage and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft, Wiz and others in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)."Key features are the Software Vulnerability Assessment and the CSM, which is the configuration check."
"Policies are very easy to manage on a day-to-day basis."
"The solution has all its capabilities in a single cloud delivery platform which is great and it provides overall good protection."
"Panorama provides centralized management capabilities for all our firewalls and locations so that we can manage different data centers through a single device, a very valuable feature. We don't have to log into various devices to oversee them individually."
"The remediation process is easy compared to other platforms."
"It is easy to use, easy to integrate, and is stable. It's scalable as well."
"The protection for web-based applications was helpful for my colleagues who didn't want a particular application on their devices. And the non-web access protection was more for our developers because they were writing and building code on their computers. Prisma Access was able to protect them."
"It's great that we can make sure a machine meets the minimum requirements before users are allowed to log in."
"Overall, the cost savings, ease of deployment, and better VPN user experience and performance are valuable."
"It's very stable. Sometimes after installing the boxes, we leave them for one or two years. We would just touch the box in the case of the customer needing new requirements or changes to the setup."
"Anything outside of the software vulnerability management and the CSM, things like the GhostPort, need some improvement. The dashboard is in beta. It looks really good, I wish it would come out of beta."
"Of all the advertised functions, I only find two things that really work in my environment, even though I wanted to use all of them. They're not flexible enough to be used."
"The reports and graphs are unintuitive."
"In the CSM module the policies are really hard to work with it. It is not very flexible at all. I would suggest that they change that. Right now, the scan is based on the group that the server is in. What happens if the server is in multiple groups?"
"It is a managed firewall. When you run into issues and have to troubleshoot, there is a fair amount of restriction. You run into a couple of restrictions where you don't have any visibility on what is happening on the Palo Alto managed infrastructure, and you need to get on a call to get technical assistance from Palo Alto's technical support. You have to get them to work with you to fix the problem. I would definitely like them to work on the visibility into what happens inside Palo Alto's infrastructure. It is not about getting our hands onto their infrastructure to do troubleshooting or fixing problems; it is just about getting more visibility. This will help us in guiding technical support folks to the area where they need to work."
"The frequency of updates could be reduced."
"There should be a dedicated portal or SASE-based solution. They're trying to add a plugin but it needs a dedicated portal because it is now an enterprise solution for multiple organizations. People should be able to directly log in to a dedicated page for Prisma Access, rather than going into a Panorama plugin, and always having to update the plugin."
"The Cloud Management application has room for improvement. There are a lot of things on the roadmap for that application; things are going to happen soon."
"Sometimes, we encountered a portal crash. When we told Palo Alto they said it might be the browser or cache, but I think they need to improve it on their side."
"Prisma's integration between operational technology and IT should be more seamless. Right now, it requires additional setup and maintenance."
"The initial support team is not very good. Most of the time, I have found that they are one to three years experienced only. They don't have network expertise. They know about Palo Alto products but don't know how to troubleshoot the issues. We have to guide them most of the time to troubleshoot correctly since their approach is not developed."
"It applies commits to the firewalls slowly. There isn't an API you can use for anything. We've previously had trouble with the egress IP addresses though we expressed to engineering that those mustn't change. They changed several times without warning, causing a lot of headaches."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CloudPassage is ranked 41st in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 55 reviews. CloudPassage is rated 8.0, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CloudPassage writes "CloudPassage has a bunch of features. Be sure you understand all of them and how to extract value to your organization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks writes "Integration with Palo Alto platforms such as Cortex Data Lake and Autofocus gives us visibility into our attack surface". CloudPassage is most compared with , whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Netskope , Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Prisma SD-WAN.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.