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 has improved our organization with its firewall."
"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 tool's support is good."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"Threat prevention and traffic monitoring are the most valuable features for us."
"Especially for big, worldwide clients, one of the most valuable features is being able to create some rules to place on the security groups."
"Palo Alto technical support is excellent."
"Overall, the functionality was very good."
"I like its flexibility."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"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."
"Everything about the reporting and everything about Palo Alto Networks Panorama is good."
"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."
"It is an expensive product."
"We found a vulnerability where when we have a low flow, like 2.7K, it is not getting fired by the threat prevention. That's something important to improve on. They should have a proxy or some solution to solve the issue. We also found some issues around decrypting the flow. When we have more flow than expected to decrypt, the performance goes down."
"An area for improvement would be the connectivity, which sometimes means logs can be slow to display."
"This would be a better solution if it were more tightly integrated with the firewalls."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"Reporting might be an area to improve. It can provide reporting or some sort of graphical representation of your environment."
"The pricing is quite high."
"The solution should improve the speed at which they make changes on the system. Historically, they've been a bit slow in that respect. They should apply changes to the box quicker and more often."
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.