Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks K2-Series.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The ease of management and configuration should be improved. The price of the K2 series could be lower.
The technical support, and how they provide it to the client, needs to be improved. They take too long to provide answers. I would like to have a statistical report that shows the number of times that each rule is used.
The solution could be improved with more dedicated reporting about the user's context. For example, if I need to have a summarized report that includes uses as well as consolidating the user's activities, threads and applications on the endpoint machine, Palo Alto does not have the visibility for the endpoint in their firewalls. If I want to have a report from the firewall that summarizes user application from the user side, rather than the server side, Palo Alto software does not have that information. Other vendors, such as Cisco, have that in their profile. You can generate a report from Cisco firewall and it will tell you that you're using the internet, and using Firefox or Google Chrome. Palo Alto doesn't have that extended visibility to the end point. It would be the same for additional features - I need to have the visibility of the endpoint application, endpoint context. It's an innate feature in Cisco firewalls. I don't like the style of Forte, for example. It has email spam over the firewall. I don't like this feature, and I don't like to have features that are not really good for out of the box. What Forte does have that is good is an explicit proxy capability and Palo Alto could include that.
In terms of what needs improvement, Palo Alto is lacking abilities that other firewalls can do. They disable the current sessions when you think the hardest part is done. They have a workaround for authentication, but then our clients just use the local database of the device itself. Some of the small to medium businesses are using these features and it would be easier for us to upsell the product up to other networks. Palo Alto Networks is quite a bit higher when it comes to prices. They should implement the features that the other firewalls have. In the next release, I would like for them to include a checkbox where the user could disable concurrent users of the portal.
There are a lot of bugs in this solution.
It's like anything else. What's good today might not be in a day, a week, a month, etc. The solution needs to constantly be adapting and updating. The solution needs a series of OS changes.
There is not really anything that needs to be improved in the product. It might be nice if it were possible for newer users to get a higher level of support.