Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Our primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Panorama  is as a firewall for internal and external traffic.

The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama , in my case, is the reporting. It provides all the necessary information. However, when extracting reports to a CSV file, the lack of correlation to the actual report generated is an issue. You get a CSV file with a vague name, which is inconvenient when sorting through multiple reports. Naming the reports properly for easier identification would be helpful. Despite this, the tool allows for extensive customization of reports, which is a significant advantage.

From the reporting side, naming the reports properly so that they can be easily identified would be an improvement. Other than that, it works well. There was a bug causing us to not get the latest information, but it was resolved with an upgrade.

I have been working with Palo Alto Networks Panorama for at least three years.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is very stable. In my three years of use, there was only one incident where I had a problem, but it was quickly resolved.

It is easy to scale with no problems.

The customer service and support are very good. We received excellent feedback from the third-party support providers.

Positive

I was not involved in the initial setup, but I believe it would be quite easy.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is expensive but provides good value for money. For the higher end, the cost is justified. However, for the lower end, a reduction in cost could improve competitiveness.

I really like the product. My involvement began when we faced an external denial-of-service attack on our cloud environment. After unsuccessfully battling the attack for a week, we deployed a Palo Alto firewall, which resolved the issue within hours. Since then, I have been impressed with Palo Alto. Overall, I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

On-premises

I am still working for Lotus. We work with Palo Alto three series, Panorama, and Firewall Banu, specifically Firewall three series and five series.

I find this solution valuable for full monitoring, centralized control for reporting, and centralized management. These features are instrumental in achieving effective results.

The solution requires more flexibility and quicker response times. High-speed replies are crucial. 

Additionally, the AI module should be on-premises, not in the cloud. It should support more flexibility and OpenShift Direct, not just the basics. 

The virtualization feature needs to be more advanced.

I have been using it for about one year.

It is very good in terms of scalability.

I would rate customer service as seven out of ten.

Neutral

The setup cost is too high.

Consider the environment, as it is very high priced. If you have money to spare, it's a good option. I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

On-premises

What do you like best about the product?

For me, one of the best features that Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers is: the centralized management and the visibility across multiple firewalls.

What do you dislike about the product?

For me Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers many good features, the Complexity for New Users, Learning Curve and the Initial Setup are some aspects that the users can find hard or difficult at the beginning.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

One problem experienced was that Without centralized management, the organization face a hard time trying to enforce uniform security policies across a large network. And that generate security vulnerabilities for the company.
The Solution that Palo alto offers is that allows the centralized creation and the enforcement of security policies, that can be applied across all the managed firewalls in the network of the company.
From my point of view, the benefit that i can observed is that the consistency in the security posture and a stronger defense against differents attacks, that offers Palo Alto, and the security policies are uniform across the whole environment, it will reduce the chances of a policy loophole and a hard time for the company.

What do you like best about the product?

Good graphical representation and user interface

What do you dislike about the product?

Nothing to dislike about this product and its quality

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

It gives internal as well as external threats

I primarily use Palo Alto Networks Panorama  for the global administration of firewalls and managing the GlobalProtect  services. It is used for logging and standard firewall activity, and opening firewall rules. Additionally, it centralizes various tasks on the platform.

The main value of Palo Alto Networks Panorama  lies in its ability to centralize management, similar to FortiManager. It provides a single dashboard for all firewalls, allowing centralized control over different feeder systems based on Palo Alto. It's a comprehensive solution for managing firewalls globally.

There is room for improvement in the graphical user interface (GUI), which is becoming outdated, especially the NAT section. However, it still meets expectations and works well for our needs.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for three years.

Stability is rated highly at nine out of ten.

Scalability depends on whether it's a hardware or virtual machine model, and I rate it at eight out of ten.

I rate technical support at seven out of ten. It depends on the case, with room for improvement in both quality and response time.

Neutral

In comparison, I prefer Panorama over FortiManager because Panorama includes all the modules needed for troubleshooting, unlike FortiAnalyzer. From an operational perspective, Panorama is better.

The initial setup for Panorama is simple.

Overall, I rate Panorama an eight out of ten and would recommend it to other users.

Hybrid Cloud

Other