If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering Palo Alto Networks K2-Series, what would you say?
How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?
My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to ensure that they have the policies correct. Overall, this is a very good product that is doing well in the market here. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Overall, this is a very good firewall and I would recommend it. With respect to security, it is a perfect solution. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
It's a good product. I would suggest people think about the design, the architecture, what they have and the applications. If they have a different kind of firewall, if they have an internet firewall, they can use the Palo Alto tool. Or they can use something else depending on what they have on their network. I recommend Palo Alto because it's a platform as well as a firewall and it has a lot of features. I would suggest testing the features and trying to get all the benefits of all the functions in the box. I would rate this solution a seven out of 10.
My advice to someone considering this solution would be that it's okay to spend a bit higher on your security products because Palo Alto is a bit more expensive than other products, but it is definitely worth it. The granularity of Palo Alto gives you more control over the security of your network. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
This is a product that I would recommend. My advice to anybody who is implementing it is to make sure that you have full control over all of the features that you are using. Overall, the features are very good but the price is too high. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.
I'd advise companies considering setting up the solution to make sure they have a trained team. If the team doesn't have any expertise with this type of firewall, then they've got to take some training. The training's pretty good and once you understand the concepts, it's pretty quick to put together. At the time we implemented it, it was easier than Check Point and the Check Point had a lot of similar capabilities. It also offered finer filtering on what was going to be allowed through various parts of the firewall ports. I'd rate the solution ten out of ten due to its reliability and ease, and the consistency of configuration.
On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would give Palo Alto a rating of nine-out-of-ten. I would not give the product a ten and it is not really because there are additional features can be included to make it a perfect ten. Nobody is perfect. Based on smaller support issues is not really something I can rate a product on. Based on their performance in being a leader of these technologies and the leaders and the inventors of next-generation firewalls — based on that, I am giving them a nine. They have better processing which Palo Alto is the only one doing. Based on that and IPS system I give them a nine. And because I am not a perfect guy, I keep one Mark.