We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB and Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool blocks URLs."
"Prohibited URLs can be listed by category."
"Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is easy to use, easy to operate, and easy to edit."
"It's allowed us to have better visibility and protection from threats."
"Being able to manage blacklists and whitelists easily is very useful, especially for internal access and limiting outbound access."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The Palo Alto solution has improved our organization by providing threat protection across a variety of internet connections. Our company also gets valuable insights regarding threat analysis."
"The most valuable feature is that the product can do everything in a single device, including the firewall, rules, and the PBL. It also has good routing and switching."
"Threat Stack has connectivity."
"It has been quite helpful to have the daily alerts coming to my email, as well as the Sev 1 Alerts... We just went through a SOX audit and those were pivotal."
"The rules are really great. They give us more visibility and control over what's being triggered. There's a large set of rules that come out-of-the-box. We can customize them and we can create our own rules based on the traffic patterns that we see."
"Every other security tool we've looked is good at containers, or at Kubernetes, is good at AWS, or at instance monitoring. But nobody is good at tying all of those things together, and that's really where Threat Stack shines."
"We like the ability of the host security module to monitor the processes running on our servers to help us monitor activity."
"It is scalable. It deploys easily with curl and yum."
"There has been a measurable decrease in the meantime to remediation... because we have so many different tech verticals already collated in one place, our ability to respond is drastically different than it used to be."
"With Threat Stack, we quickly identified some AWS accounts which had services that would potentially be exposed and were able to remediate them prior to release of products."
"An area for improvement would be the technical support, which can be slow."
"Support needs to be enhanced."
"We have had some challenges with making Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB work with ELK stack."
"It is an expensive solution and not everyone has the budget for it."
"Performance monitoring could use improvement."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
"One way Palo Alto can improve is by offering sandboxing. I don't know if they currently offer a sandboxing feature together with the firewall or not. They should provide secure sandboxing with the firewalls."
"For hosting sites like Blogspot, they host sites that should be in different categories, but get lumped together in general. There needs to be more granularity or multiple categorizations."
"The one thing that we know they're working on, but we don't have through the tool, is the application layer. As we move to a serverless environment, with AWS Fargate or direct Lambda, that's where Threat Stack does not have the capacity to provide feed. Those are areas that it's blind to now..."
"They could give a few more insights into security groups and recommendations on how to be more effective. That's getting more into the AWS environment, specifically. I'm not sure if that's Threat Stack's plan or not, but I would like them to help us be efficient about how we're setting up security groups. They could recommend separation of VPCs and the like - really dig into our architecture. I haven't seen a whole lot of that and I think that's something that, right off the bat, could have made us smarter."
"It shoots back a lot of alerts."
"The user interface can be a little bit clunky at times... There's a lot of information that needs to be waded through, and the UI just isn't great."
"Some features do not work as expected."
"The compliance and governance need improvement."
"The API - which has grown quite a bit, so we're still learning it and I can't say whether it still needs improvement - was an area that had been needing it."
"I would like further support of Windows endpoint agents or the introduction of support for Windows endpoint agents."
More Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is ranked 17th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 8 reviews while Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is ranked 27th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS). Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is rated 8.4, while Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB writes "Provides regular updates with an auto download option; prohibited URLs can be listed by category ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform writes "SecOps program for us, as a smaller company, is amazing; they know what to look for". Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB is most compared with Check Point IPS, Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Zscaler Cloud IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Darktrace, whereas Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Darktrace, AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Qualys VMDR and Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP. See our Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB vs. Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.