Palo Alto Networks Panorama

We are still on Palo Alto Networks products because it is delivering value to our organization. We are using the products ourselves, so we function as a customer. We do not have much cloud presence, so most of our solutions are on-premises. We utilize the traditional features such as GlobalProtect  and are not using anything from Cortex. We have two PA-850 firewalls that are being managed by Palo Alto Networks Panorama .

I utilize Palo Alto Networks Panorama 's centralized view for monitoring. Palo Alto Networks Panorama serves as our log collector, with all logs from the firewalls being pushed to it. Palo Alto Networks Panorama has an ACC tab that I use to conduct monitoring.

We do not currently have a SIEM  solution, so we are heavily relying on the monitoring features of Palo Alto Networks Panorama to conduct our investigations and log reviews. It is really heavily used because if you want to get visibility into the telemetries coming in and out of our network, Palo Alto Networks Panorama is what we rely on because we do not have a SIEM  solution.

I do utilize Palo Alto Networks Panorama's advanced reporting, which comes with out-of-the-box features. I do reporting using Palo Alto Networks Panorama as part of my day-to-day activity. Every month, I need to send a report to my boss, and I use the Palo Alto Networks Panorama reporting feature to do that.

I think Palo Alto Networks Panorama's application and threat visibility features are solid because the App-ID feature is excellent. It helps me to better understand the kind of traffic that I am monitoring by providing details of the protocol and application type. The threats monitoring feature is great, and comparing Palo Alto Networks to other competitors, while Palo Alto Networks is quite expensive, I am really satisfied with the threats monitoring features because I feel my company is getting value for what we are paying for.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama's ability to manage multiple firewalls is solid as long as you ensure that you have the required resources for it, depending on the number of firewalls that you want to place under Palo Alto Networks Panorama. My Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a VM version, not a physical box, so from time to time, I have to ensure that the ESXi host hosting Palo Alto Networks Panorama has better capability in terms of IOPs, CPU, and memory. Once the resource requirement is adequate, Palo Alto Networks Panorama does a very good job because the log syncing ensures that the firewalls being managed by Palo Alto Networks Panorama are in sync and communicate with each other very well. Having Palo Alto Networks Panorama makes life easier because we cannot afford downtime, not even minimal downtime. With Palo Alto Networks Panorama, it helps you achieve high availability, whether active-passive or active-active, with ease.

I would say that while Palo Alto Networks Panorama reporting capability is functional, it is not really intuitive. The presentation is not really as advanced as what an advanced solution would have provided.

I would like to improve the dashboards on Palo Alto Networks Panorama, especially because I work in an environment where my managers are not really that technical. They do a great job leading us, but they do not have a technical background. If the dashboard could be improved to suit more executive use cases when it comes to reporting, that would be excellent. It is basic as far as I am concerned, and from an executive standpoint, it is not really that good.

I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama as a product nine or 9.5 out of ten because there is always room for improvement, especially on the dashboard. I think if they could improve the dashboard, I would give them ten out of ten because from a technical standpoint, the dashboard is good, but at an executive level, it is not really that good. I usually struggle when doing presentations to my bosses because the dashboard and reporting from Palo Alto Networks Panorama are not as polished as they could be.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama personally for the past five years.

I think the technical support by Palo Alto Networks is great because the response time is solid. Palo Alto Networks is so reliable that we hardly actually raise a ticket. It almost never breaks, so we rarely rely on technical support.

I get advisory from Palo Alto Networks from time to time if there is a new Pan-OS or if there are vulnerabilities on the existing Pan-OS. We also conduct a BPA to address any security gap by ourselves. So we hardly actually rely on their technical support.

We have had some issues related to SSL decryption. The SSL certificate we used had expired, so we renewed it. However, implementing it on Palo Alto Networks still presents pending issues. We raised support for that, and it has not been closed yet, but it is not entirely a Palo Alto Networks issue. I think it is more about the certificate. It is a pending issue, but it is not really critical, so we have not revisited it.

Palo Alto Networks firewall is expensive as a whole product.

In my region, which is Ghana, West Africa, most people usually use Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, so the price comparison was actually on Sophos and FortiGate.

Sophos and FortiGate do not have any advantages over Palo Alto Networks Panorama because their machine learning capabilities are not top-notch as compared to Palo Alto Networks. That is why we are so satisfied to stay with Palo Alto Networks.

We do not have Palo Alto Networks' threat intelligence platforms or data loss prevention features in our subscription. We have other ways of dealing with DLPs, but on the firewall, we do not have that feature activated.

We are dealing with DLP  by other vendors, not Palo Alto Networks. We utilize Microsoft Office 365 , which has a feature called Purview  for DLP  capability. We are dealing with Microsoft products, specifically Exchange. Our Microsoft licensing includes E5 and E3, which come with certain features, and we utilize all those features.

We go through a dealer regarding our partnership with Microsoft and Palo Alto Networks. We are not directly partners.

We also use CyberArk PAM, and it is great to hear that Palo Alto Networks acquired CyberArk. My overall review rating for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is nine out of ten.

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.

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.