We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Trellix Network Detection and Response 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."We use the product on our Azure network firewalls."
"The interface with Panorama makes it very easy to use."
"What I like about the VM-Series is that you can launch them in a very short time."
"It offers a single pane of glass for all the different types of installations."
"The feature that I have found the most useful is that it meets all our requirements technically."
"The most effective features for threat prevention are application-based prevention and WildFire. These features cover various threats, such as ransomware, malware, etc. They provide real-time visibility. By applying appropriate policies, threats can be blocked."
"The main advantage of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series stems from the fact that you can access it with the help of cloud services."
"It is reliable and the support is very good."
"Application categorization is the most valuable feature for us. Application filtering is very interesting because other products don't give you full application filtering capabilities."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"Over the thirteen years of using the product, we have not experienced a single compromise in our environment. During the COVID period, we faced numerous DDoS attacks, and the tool proved highly effective in mitigating these threats."
"The sandbox feature of FireEye Network Security is very good. The operating system itself has many features and it supports our design."
"The server appliance is good."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"Its web interface is a bit outdated, and it needs to be updated. They can also improve the NAT functionality. We have had issues with the NAT setup."
"The product could be better in terms of performance than one of its competitors."
"There could be dynamic DNS features similar to Fortinet in the product."
"The DLP functionality or data classification can be improved in the solution's basic firewalling."
"The implementation should be simplified."
"It can definitely improve on the performance."
"The command-line interface is something that some people struggle with and I think that they should have an option to go straight to the GUI."
"Palo Alto should update their documentation to make it more readable and provide easier-to-follow instructions through videos."
"The product's integration capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"Its documentation can be improved. The main problem that I see with FireEye is the documentation. We are an official distributor and partner of FireEye, and we have access to complete documentation about how to configure or implement this technology, but for customers, very limited documentation is available openly. This is the area in which FireEye should evolve. All documents should be easily available for everyone."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 52 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 35 reviews. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Blocks traffic and DDoS attacks ". Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate and Vectra AI. See our Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response 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.
