Compare Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs. Recorded Future

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Recorded Future, Group-IB and others in Threat Intelligence Platforms. Updated: May 2021.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"The feature that I like best is the dashboard.""The most valuable feature is alerting.""It integrates well with other solutions and provides good threat intelligence in terms of external threats."

More Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus Pros »

"As a threat intelligence tool, it's very helpful."

More Recorded Future Pros »

Cons
"I would like to have more technical documentation that contains greater detail on the types of threats that are occurring.""It would be better if they used the threat intelligence feeds directly from their side and changing the verdict instead of us requesting it.""It is a completely cloud-based product at present."

More Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus Cons »

"The solution would benefit from introducing automation."

More Recorded Future Cons »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is alerting.
Top Answer: At times in AutoFocus, when you have a homegrown application or you check another threat intelligence feed, it's not malicious but is still categorized as gray. We need to request a change in the… more »
Top Answer: We are using AutoFocus with my playbooks. We use it on a daily basis. We receive alerts on the Playbook. We receive alerts for threat intelligence, malware alerts, and virus alerts. We use Autofocus… more »
Top Answer: As a threat intelligence tool, it's very helpful.
Top Answer: The pricing is quite high compared to other intelligence tools. The licensing is based on the user and also the amount of usage. It's expensive in terms of what you can get. You need to be a very… more »
Top Answer: The product is too big. The vast majority of data you have. You can run queries and you can get more data than you probably want, and you have to take a deep dive a lot of the time. The solution would… more »
Ranking
Views
1,104
Comparisons
749
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
385
Rating
8.0
Views
4,653
Comparisons
3,447
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
941
Rating
9.0
Popular Comparisons
Learn More
Overview

AutoFocus contextual threat intelligence service accelerates analysis, correlation and prevention workflows. Unique, targeted attacks are automatically prioritized with full context, allowing security teams to respond to critical attacks faster, without additional IT security resources.

Recorded Future arms security teams with threat intelligence powered by patented machine learning to lower risk. Our technology automatically collects and analyzes information from an unrivaled breadth of sources and provides invaluable context that’s delivered in real time and packaged for human analysis or instant integration with existing security technology.
Offer
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus
Learn more about Recorded Future
Sample Customers
Telkom Indonesia
Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider21%
Computer Software Company18%
Insurance Company9%
Media Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company29%
Comms Service Provider17%
Financial Services Firm9%
Energy/Utilities Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Recorded Future, Group-IB and others in Threat Intelligence Platforms. Updated: May 2021.
510,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is ranked 12th in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 3 reviews while Recorded Future is ranked 2nd in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 1 review. Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is rated 8.0, while Recorded Future is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus writes "Identifies critical attacks, easy to use, stable, and integrates well ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Recorded Future writes "Great dashboard, pretty stable, and good at threat intelligence gathering". Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is most compared with LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, Cisco Threat Grid, Trend Micro Deep Discovery, ThreatStream and Rapid7 InsightIDR, whereas Recorded Future is most compared with Digital Shadows, ZeroFOX, IntSights, ThreatConnect and Blueliv Threat Compass.

See our list of best Threat Intelligence Platforms vendors.

We monitor all Threat Intelligence Platforms 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.