We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall Manager and Palo Alto Networks Panorama based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
"It is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"The tool's support is good."
"It's great for creating signatures and activating activities."
"I found logging and management features the most valuable in Palo Alto Networks Panorama. Another good feature of the product is that it lets you define global firewall policies and templates."
"This solution is user-friendly. It is centrally managed and provides role optimization, without the need for additional tools."
"Networks Panorama has improved our organizational security"
"One valuable feature is centralized management. We are able to manage it centrally for two to three remote offices, our head office and our data centers. So, it is very simple to manage."
"Firewalls: The application ID capabilities have been very useful for things like Active Directory, and not having to identify every port that Microsoft has decided to use."
"I like the quality of this product, and it performs. It's the best solution in the IT business."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama provides many features, such as alerts, traffic monitoring, and logs."
"The tool's security features need to improve. It needs also to include a monitoring system for logs. It is also complicated to find a query on the Azure firewall."
"There should be a simple one-click deployment for a firewall, rather than a set of setup instructions that include steps such as the DNS configuration, et cetera."
"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"When creating remote access for users, it would be beneficial to be able to base the object on on-premises or the cloud."
"Instead of searching their knowledge base in their website, maybe they can interact with us in the user interface to explain things better."
"It is an expensive product."
"Customer support can improve."
"It's difficult to implement."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be better."
"The pricing is quite high."
"We have had some issues in the past because integrating a new device is not intuitive."
Azure Firewall Manager is ranked 13th in Firewall Security Management with 5 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is ranked 3rd in Firewall Security Management with 81 reviews. Azure Firewall Manager is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks Panorama is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall Manager writes "Useful testing, simple configuration, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama writes "Built-in proxy with the ability to maintain your own policies". Azure Firewall Manager is most compared with Azure Firewall, AWS Firewall Manager, FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF), Tufin Orchestration Suite and AlgoSec, whereas Palo Alto Networks Panorama is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, AlgoSec, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, Tufin Orchestration Suite and Fortinet FortiPortal. See our Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.