Palo Alto Networks WildFire Reviews

• App-ID
• User-ID
• Ease of deployment and usability
• Filtering Mechanism like SP3 Engine

From a technical perspective this has given us a new high as this is how a technology solution should function. From a sales perspective, we have been able to pitch the solution to new customers as it seems cheap to customers when we bundle the solution, compared to getting each device for individual functions.

• IP SLA tracking
• GRE tunnel support

I believe these are the major improvements in the pipeline.

I've been using it for four years.

It crashes too frequently for a few boxes, which could be expected from a new vendor as it evolves. The best part is RMA, as you get the box back quickly if you have it in the contract.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

If it is Arrow support, it's pathetic. I wouldn't recommend them. However, if you go directly with the PA team they are the best tech junkies I have worked with.

6/10.

We used to have Netscreen as our favourite, but it went EOL. Being an MSP we have to have expertise with all the devices. Although, Netscreen is our favourite.

I would say that this is difficult to answer, as the setup would be adaptable based on the mode you use, and the way the firewall can be configured. If you ask an expert it would be straightforward. If you ask a newbie, it would be not that difficult to configure if you follow the mentioned steps.

Go forward, this is an amazing device to be implemented if you have the cost to bear.

Being able to discover malicious files unknown to most AV vendors.

It has allowed me to stop new attacks before they could gain a foothold in my network.

• Inspection over different protocols (not just HTTP/FTP)
• Inspecting more file types
• Providing information back to the community that it uses to support its product.

I've used it for three years. However, my current company isn't using the product. I took a different engineering route into the company and I decided to use other protection solutions and not Wildfire.

The deployment of Wildfire was surprisingly easy.

Wildfire itself was a very stable product.

I never had any issues with scalability. When I enabled it, it seemed to work in the environment that the firewall was already servicing.

Great when I was at a large company but average or less than average at a small company.

Overall their support people are better than most tech companies.

There was no solution in this space before Wildfire. Both FireEye and Wildfire came onto the market right around the same time.

It was straightforward as I could, literally, turn on the firewall settings in five minutes or less.

You really don't need to pay to turn it on. The configuration is very simple.

There are two levels of Wildfire.

1. The free version which is great, so I would guess there is no ROI on this version
2. Then there is the subscription version of the service and this is a very affordable yearly subscription per firewall

Initially, the product doesn't cost anything for the first tier of usage you can prove the product before buying it.

• FireEye
• Blue Coat
• ProofPoint.
• Even as the more the list of products I look at each year is pretty long.

If you're running Palo Alto firewalls there is no reason not to use it at the free level. Once you have run it for a while at the basic level, you can make an educated decision if it's worth paying for the subscription (it is).

We use WildFire for malware protection in our customers' companies.

WildFire's application encryption is useful.

The system performance degrades after the solution has been deployed for some time. The data that it gives us becomes a little bit slow. When you try to get some data for troubleshooting, it seems like it's working hard to extract that data. 

I've been selling WildFire for more than two years.

WildFire is stable.

Wildfire is scalable.

Palo Alto support is very slow in this region.

WildFire is easy to deploy. I have been working on these solutions for quite some time, so I don't foresee any issues.

WildFire is a little bit pricey. Sometimes it's difficult to sell it to customers at the current price.

We sometimes use Fortinet FortiGate for clients. It depends upon the requirements, which vary from customer to customer. 

I rate WildFire six out of 10. To people considering WildFire, I recommend that they understand their own needs. They should do the proper due diligence. Right now, everybody's cutting costs because of COVID-19. They're trying to automate most things through the PA, so the cost-cutting is going to be a major factor in the future.

We are using the solution for our zero-day advanced persistent threats(APT). Additionally, we are using it as our only sole network distribution.

I have found that there are many good features found with this solution. There is the option of cloud and an on-premises version. 

The service-level agreement(SLA) provides the ability to converts the unknown to the known in less than five minutes. 

The environment analysis runs in multiple areas and does not just execute in one area, such as the virtual hypervisor.

The solution is completely integrated with all the other Palo Alto products. I think that it is the best part for endpoint protection. The firewall features include URL and DNS filtering, threat protection, and antivirus. 

The threat intelligence that we receiving in the reporting was not as expected. We were expecting more. Additionally, we should be able to whitelist a specific file based on a variety of attributes.

In a future release, they could make the solution be a stand-alone deployment, one that does not need another Palo Alto solution and can integrate with any other solution from another company. For example, we could use this solution together with other solutions, such as Fortinet firewalls or endpoint solutions. 

The solution is stable and reliable. Since it is on the cloud we do not have to worry about this much.

The solution is scalable. We have approximately 400 users using the solution. We currently do not plan to increase the capacity because our maximum amount of users would be 500 users and we only have approximately 300 on-premise users at this time while the rest of them are working remotely.

I have found the technical support responsive.

Since it is a cloud-based version the setup was straightforward and easy, we just have to activate the license to use it.

We are on an annual subscription. When we purchased the firewall, we had activated this solutions license for a minimum of one year. The price of the solution is fair.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Palo Alto Networks WildFire a ten out of ten.

The primary use case for this solution is the attention to detail. IT is also easy to manage, and easy to use. It is a really good product.

The reporting feature helps our performance. 

I really like the product, it is easy to manage and easy to use.

In the duration of our use, it has been stable.

It is a scalable product. We have had no issues with scalability.

I have not had issues with technical support of this solution.

The initial setup was very easy for us. 

The pricing is OK, it is not too expensive.

We looked at other products, but found PaloAlto to be the best solution for our needs.

I would give this product a rating of 9 out of 10 due to some slight issues of performance.

It has one of the best WebUIs that I have used, because at a glance looks simple, but offers us a lot of options to secure all the traffic that is passing through the device (or all traffic that the user decides to pass through). Besides, the way that scan the applications to detect what kind of application is do not affect anything about the device's performance. The way that the product process or handle the traffic, is one of the best in the industry.

Well, I work as a security consultant, so one of my functions is to help and provide to the end users with recommendations about technologies or process to secure their network. So, one of my customer decide to migrate from TMG/UMG to Palo Alto, it took a while, but during this process, I showed them many ways to improve their current security with Palo Alto, and after a while, they are very comfortable with the technology, for them now, it is easier to apply some kind of web filtering or application filtering than the past.

I'd like to see a wizard to create IPSec VPNs. They need to  improve the graphics to show the network behavior.

Deployment is easy.

The stability is acceptable.

It depends about the project, but offers a good HA option.

Always show to the customer what the product can do for them and what not, is a good practice, because they can open their eyes and to be sure what are the benefits of that technology. Always analyze the network topology, using the customer's network diagram and ask every doubt that you have, for my experience a good analysis and deployment plan give us a successful implementation.

We primarily use Wildfire products to prevent attacks. As resellers, we showcase the Wildfire capabilities like handling known and unknown threats on the customer side. 

The way that the solution quickly updates to adjust to threats is the solution's most valuable aspect. When there's a security attack, within five minutes, all Wildfire subscribers have access to updates so that all systems will be safe. Its threat prevention is way better than other vendor products.

In terms of threat prevention capabilities, the solution doesn't need any improvements that I can see. We've been quite satisfied.

The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective.

I've been using the solution for nine months now. I'm new to Palo Alto Networks but I have been using the solution since I started working with Palo Alto Networks on the reseller side.

We've dealt with technical support in the past. Once you open a ticket from the support portal, you will be assigned an engineer. That engineer will only focus on your case until it is solved. It's unlike other vendors that don't necessarily give you the same engineer or service representative for the same ticket. It offers good continuity when there are issues to be resolved. We've been quite satisfied with their level of service.

I've used Sophos Firewall in the past. They can also block or scan threats. 

The solution is very straightforward. Setting it up is easy. We just create a Wildfire profile then apply it on the security parcel. It is pretty straightforward.

The pricing of the solution is a bit higher, but it's worth the extra money you will spend because of the protection that you get.

I really recommend Palo Alto Networks. Out of 10 stars, I would give 11. 

I would recommend the solution because it's so easy to deploy and when you read the security profiles, it's very easy to handle, unlike other vendors. When it comes to threat protection, the features are easy to use and understand.

We use it for remote access and security.

Remote access is excellent.

Management and web filtering can be improved. There should also be better reporting, particularly around web filtering.

We've had it for years.

It is very stable.

We were using another solution. We switched for more features.

Its initial setup is complex. It is specialized. It is not off-the-shelf stuff. 

We used a reseller. It took six months. You need two to three people for its deployment and maintenance.

It depends on the features. Additional features cost additional money as well.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.