Anonymous UserSecurity Architect at a computer software company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"It has helped us understand the dynamic topology of our containers, and manage security through the application of policies that our pipelines apply straight from Git."
"The most valuable feature is that the rule set is managed and that it can be run on a regularly scheduled basis."
"The runtime mechanism on the solution is very useful. It's got very good network mapping between containers. If you have more than one container, you can create a content data link between them."
"The product is quite good for providing multi-clouds or cross-cloud security from a single-pane -of-glass."
"I would say Twistlock is a fairly sophisticated tool."
"One of the most valuable features is the compliance of RedLock, which we are using for any issues with security. It flags them and that's the primary objective of that feature."
"I was looking for a vulnerability scanner and I was looking for one place in which I could find everything. This tool not only does vulnerability scanning, but it also gives me an asset management tool."
"It scans our containers in real time. Also, as they're built, it's looking into the container repository where the images are built, telling us ahead of time, "You have vulnerabilities here, and you should update this code before you deploy." And once it's deployed, it's scanning for vulnerabilities that are in production as the container is running."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"I would like to see the inclusion of automated counter-attack, although this is probably illegal."
"The pricing for the solution needs improvement."
"The innovation side of the solution could be more efficient and more detailed."
"Palo Alto should work on ease-of-use and the user-friendliness to be more competitive with some competing products."
"In terms of improvement, there are some small things like hardening and making sure the Linux resources are deployed well but that's more at an operational level."
"The feedback that we have given to the Palo Alto team is that the UI can be improved. When you press the "back" button on your browser from the Investigate tab, the query that you're working on just disappears. It won't keep the query on the "back" button."
"We would like it to have more features from the risk and compliance perspectives."
"The challenge that Palo Alto and Prisma have is that, at times, the instructions in an event are a little bit dated and they're not usable. That doesn't apply to all the instructions, but there are times where, for example, the Microsoft or the Amazon side has made some changes and Palo Alto or Prisma was not aware of them. So as we try to remediate an alert in such a case, the instructions absolutely do not work. Then we open up a ticket and they'll reply, "Oh yeah, the API for so-and-so vendor changed and we'll have to work with them on that." That area could be done a little better."
"GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"Guardicore Centra provides better value for money than NSX, was the other solution that we looked at, which was too expensive for what it does."
"This is not a cheap solution but you have to consider the bigger picture, which is what it is giving you."
"Our licensing fees are $18,000 USD per year."
"One thing we're very pleased about is how the licensing model for Prisma is based on work resources. You buy a certain amount of work resources and then, as they enable new capabilities within Prisma, it just takes those work resource units and applies them to new features. This enables us to test and use the new features without having to go back and ask for and procure a whole new product, which could require going through weeks, and maybe months, of a procurement process."
"The pricing and the licensing are both very fair... The biggest advice I would give in terms of costs would be to try to understand what the growth is going to look like. That's really been our biggest struggle, that we don't have an idea of what our future growth is going to be on the platform. We go from X number of licenses to Y number of licenses without a plan on how we're going to get from A to B, and a lot of that comes as a bit of a surprise. It can make budgeting a real challenge for it."
"From my exposure so far, they have been really flexible on whatever your current state is, with a view to what the future state might be. There's no hard sell. They "get" the journey that you're on, and they're trying to help you embrace cloud security, governance, and compliance as you go."
"If a competitor came along and said, "We'll give you half the price," that doesn't necessarily mean that's the right answer, at all. We wouldn't necessarily entertain it that way. Does it do what we need it to do? Does it work with the things that we want it to work with? That is the important part for us. Pricing wasn't the big consideration it might be in some organizations. We spend millions on public cloud. In that context, it would not make sense to worry about the small price differences that you get between the products."
"The pricing and licensing are expensive compared to the other offerings that we considered."
"I don't know a better way to do it, but their licensing is a little confusing. That's due to the breadth of different types of technologies they are trying to cover. The way you license depends on where you're securing. When they were Twistlock it was a simple licensing scheme and you could tell what you were doing. Now that they've changed that scheme with Palo Alto, it is quite confusing. It's very difficult to predict what your costs are going to be as you try to expand coverage."
"The pricing is good. They gave us some good discounts right at the end of the year based on the value that it brings, visibility, and the ability to build in cloud, compliance, and security within one dashboard."
Guardicore Centra is a comprehensive data center and cloud security solution that delivers the simplest way to apply micro-segmentation controls to reduce the attack surface and detect and control breaches within east-west traffic. It provides deep visibility into application dependencies and enforces network and process-level policies to protect critical applications.
The move to the cloud has changed all aspects of the application development lifecycle – security being foremost among them. Security and DevOps teams face a growing number of entities to secure as organizations adopt cloud native approaches. Ever-changing environments challenge developers to build and deploy at a frantic pace, while security teams remain responsible for the protection and compliance of the entire lifecycle. Prisma™ Cloud by Palo Alto Networks delivers complete security across the development lifecycle on any cloud, enabling you to develop cloud native applications with confidence.
Guardicore Centra is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Security with 9 reviews while Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Cloud Workload Security with 15 reviews. Guardicore Centra is rated 8.8, while Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Guardicore Centra writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "Gives me a holistic view of cloud security across multiple clouds or multiple cloud workloads within one cloud provider". Guardicore Centra is most compared with Cisco Secure Workload, Illumio Adaptive Security Platform, VMware NSX, Trend Micro Deep Security and Darktrace, whereas Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Aqua Security, Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Azure Security Center, Check Point Harmony Email & Office and Fortinet FortiCWP. See our Guardicore Centra vs. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks report.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Security 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.