We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"It has been scalable."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"You have better control because you define apps. You just don't define ports. You define apps, and the apps are monitored in the traffic. It is more specific than the Cisco firewall when it comes to our needs."
"The scalability is acceptable."
"What I like about Palo Alto is that it is a complete product, with everything in it."
"The most valuable features of the solution are user-friendliness, price, good security, and cloud-related options."
"Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is how it keeps up-to-date with viruses."
"We get support in the free version."
"The cloud-based services are a nice feature."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"They provide a medium level of technical support."
"When comparing this solution to others it is not as good overall."
"In the future, Palo Alto could reduce the time it takes to process the file."
"In terms of what I'd like to see in the next release of Palo Alto Networks WildFire, each release is based on malware that has been identified. The key problem is an average of six months from the time malware is written to the time it's discovered and a signature is created for it. The only advice that I can give is for them to shorten that timeframe. I don't know how they would do it, but if they shorten that, for example, cut it in half, they'll make themselves more famous."
"The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective."
"I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"The initial setup was complex."
Digital Guardian is ranked 19th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 11 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection and Fortinet FortiSandbox. See our Digital Guardian vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.