We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Sangfor NGAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."
"It is simple to manage, and there are a lot of functionalities in the same box."
"The reporting you receive out of this appliance is excellent. You will not need an external management system."
"We use a southern institution that's audited for IT security and the reporting that automatically comes off the unit makes it much easier to meet compliance standards and makes it easier as far as the amount of time that has to be spent to compile that information. If you get your reporting set up correctly when you initially set it up, you just select the one you want and hit print. The auditing trail on it is the best feature."
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"The technical support in our region is excellent."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the analytics."
"I like all the threat alerts and WildFire. I also like scanning because everything that comes into our network via customers is scanned. We're an electric company, so every one of the bills is scanned and emailed in and out of our network."
"The most valuable feature is advanced URL filtering. Its prevention capabilities and DNS security are also valuable. It pinpoints any suspicious activities and also prevents the users from doing certain things."
"We have found the application control to be the most valuable feature. Also, Layer 7, because all other products are working up to the maximum capacity. But Palo Alto is benefiting us, especially in application control management. We are able to differentiate between Oracle traffic and SQL traffic."
"The performance of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is the most valuable feature."
"One of the most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is application symmetries."
"Ability to log each and every application."
"The App-ID feature is the coolest feature because you don't need to open a new port. Apps are directly linked to the port. It provides one of the best ways to lock down the additional port switch."
"Security is the biggest thing nowadays, including threat response, incident response, and root cause. We found that a lot of the logging and dashboard capabilities offered by Palo Alto fill the missing skill gap that you run up against. It makes it easier for our tier-two staff to get involved in some of the deeper root cause analysis. The dashboards, logs, and reports make it easier for our staff to dive right in and not get lost in what tools they should use. It's easy because they're all right there."
"It is a stable solution."
"We've found the technical support to be helpful."
"I think Sangfor NGAF is more valuable than Cisco products because of its simplicity and ease of management. If I compare it with Palo Alto and Cisco, both are quite complex products. And if I compare it with FortiGate firewalls from Fortinet, I have also used all these products. Fortinet and Sangfor NGAF are similar products because the applications behind the application and policy layers are almost identical."
"You might try Sangfor if you are on a tight budget. The price is affordable, and Sangfor offers a lot of features. We don't have any complaints about Sangfor."
"In terms of the most valuable features, the IPS report is quick and updated. Performance is also valuable."
"The level of support provided to local companies is good. They transform their application control and other settings according to that country."
"The stability of Sangfor NGAF is good."
"The price versus value is good because the solution is less expensive than Sophos, Fortinet, or SonicWall."
"The user interface could be improved to make it less confusing and easier to set up."
"While FortiGate is cheaper than most other solutions, we're seeing increased license renewal costs. Most of our clients are asking for more significant discounts because the price is going up."
"The improvement is related to logs. Instead of the CLI, we should be able to have more insights into the logs of the firewall in the GUI."
"It needs more available central management."
"We were not able to build a full-mesh VPN; however, I am not sure if this was the fault of Fortinet FortiGate."
"To some degree, it's almost a question as to why some of this stuff isn't simpler. For example, for an AP deployment, while it's integrated, the number of steps that you have to go through in order to get the AP up, seems like a lot."
"Bandwidth usage in reporting could be improved for Fortinet FortiGate."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"Currently, they don't have email protection. They can maybe add it in the future. Currently, if you want to do so, you need to go with another solution."
"Customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities"
"They could improve their support and pricing and maybe integration. It's a little more expensive that Check Point but the quality is better. Integration with firewall endpoints could be better. Palo Alto does have very good malware or antivirus protection. I think they could improve on that front."
"I am in GCC in the Middle East. The support that we are getting from Palo Alto is disastrous. The problem is that the support ticket is opened through the distributor channel. Before opening a ticket, we already do a lot of troubleshooting, and when we open a ticket, it goes to a distributor channel. They end up wasting our time again doing what we have already done. They execute the same things and waste time. The distributor channel's engineer tries to troubleshoot, and after spending hours, they forward the ticket to Palo Alto. It is a very time-consuming process. The distributor channels also do not operate 24/7, and they are very lazy in responding to the calls."
"The stability, scalability for enterprise-level organizations, and technical documentation have room for improvement."
"Its stability can be better. Their technical response from the support side can also be better."
"The reporting and visibility are phenomenal, but you don't get that information out of the box. They can email reports regularly, and the functionality is all there. However, a lot of it is based on an older model for email, where customers have in-house email servers. The small and medium-sized business customers I deal with are moving toward Office 365 or some other cloud-based mail and not maintaining their own internal mail servers."
"The performance of the Panorama interface needs to be improved. It tends to be very sluggish at times."
"The solution has too many bugs and these slow down the implementation."
"The setup phase is quite complex."
"An area for improvement would be the number of ports defined on the box. In the next release, I would like them to develop their provisioning stage of enrolling end devices."
"They need to increase the number of ports in the firewall."
"The support offered by the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required. The knowledge levels and response time of the support team need improvement."
"Sangfor NGAF could improve the policies and default criteria. They could be much better."
"Sangfor NGAF could improve by refining its application control policies, especially in addressing challenges with certain types of applications."
"The GUI needs to be improved, lacks logic in some areas."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 161 reviews while Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 31 reviews. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6, while Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Stormshield Network Security, whereas Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW, Fortinet FortiOS and SonicWall NSa. See our Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs. Sangfor NGAF report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.