Palo Alto Networks K2-Series Reviews

We are a system integrator and the Palo Alto K2-Series is one of the network solutions that we implement for our clients.

Many of the implementations that I am part of are for the banking sector in Egypt and generally, they are not interested in cloud-based solutions. The K2-Series is well-suited for this use case.

This Palo Alto firewall is easy to manage. You just implement it and forget about it. The Panorama management tool is very easy to use.

The documentation is good.

The partner support, which is a local company, is not that good and can be improved.

I would like to see the threat intelligence capability integrated with other vendors such as Cisco and Forcepoint. This would effectively be a multi-threat intelligence solution. Along the same lines, it would be useful to share threat signatures with different vendors.

I have been working with this solution for more than 18 months.

All on-premises firewall solutions have an issue with scalability if they aren't designed correctly from day one. You have to measure with consideration for future expansion and include it in your design, otherwise, you will get stuck.

There are two categories of support. There is partner support, which in my case is a local company in Egypt. The support provided by the partner is not very good. However, when you purchase vendor support, it is very good.

I have experience with similar products from several vendors including Cisco, Juniper, Forcepoint, and Fortinet.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to do.

Our in-house team implements this solution for our customers.

This is an expensive solution, although you will get value for the price.

Palo Alto is the leader in next-generation firewalls. The suitability of it, however, depends on the design, throughput, and the number of sessions.

Overall, this is a very simple and very effective firewall, and I am satisfied with it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution has the best features for parallel processing and scalability.

The solution's pricing could be better.

We have been using the solution for one year.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability a ten. It is suitable for medium-scale businesses.

The solution's technical support team is good.

Positive

I rate the solution's initial setup process an eight out of ten. The time taken for deployment depends on the size of the field and other specific requirements of customers in terms of enhancing their skill paradigm. It takes approximately four hours to a day to complete. 

I rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten. It is expensive.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it a seven out of ten. Its networking, as well as endpoint and system security features, need enhancement. 

The solution is reliable and scales well.

The password function of the solution could be improved. Additionally, some of the processes take too long to complete.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks K2-Series for approximately three months.

The scalability of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is good.

I rate the stability of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series a ten out of ten.

Our customers are small to large-sized using this solution.

I rate the support of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series a ten out of ten.

Positive

We have 20 engineers deploying the solutions.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Palo Alto Networks K2-Series a ten out of ten.

I use this to provide better content to my students as an instructor.

Palo Alto's App-ID is what differentiates it from other competitors. 

Palo Alto has many other products. It would be nice for these products to be centralized under one tool rather than having to jump from tool to tool.

I have been using this product for four years.

This product is designed for large companies. The price would not be suitable for a small or medium-size company.

Your budget should be your main concern when considering K2-Series as a solution to ensure you will be able to take advantage of each feature or if you would be better off choosing a different solution.

Overall, I give this tool an eight out of ten.

Generally, the solution is used as a perimeter-based firewall with a secondary firewall covering the servers.

Benefit wise with the speed of deep packet inspection, we've found it will assist with a quicker resolution to a potential false-positive alert. You're able to drill down. It's a third to probably 75% faster than a lot of the other premier firewalls on inspections. Therefore, your root cause analysis will then come to a resolution quicker. It's all about speed.

The deep inspection functionality is great.

The solution scales well.

As long as the solution is kept updated, it's pretty stable. 

The solution provides a lot of value to the client.

The licensing cost is a typical complaint with many clients. The solution is expensive.

In terms of automation, they could get better with it, especially with third-party integration. There are not too many products that will integrate with ease to the Palo Alto product set. They keep things locked down quite hard, which technically is also a benefit. That said, third-party integration definitely would be a benefit to us, as most of our implementations are two or even three different firewalls. Having third-party tools that integrate with all three or all two other products would be a benefit.

I've used the solution since it came out, about seven years ago.

The stability of the product has to be put into a relative context. If people keep it upgraded and maintained, there are generally no issues. If they let it fall behind and we have to do a catch-up or leapfrog versions then there could be other complexities.

The solution is scalable. If a company puts in at the right requirements and they double it by 50%, which you should always do, then there is lots of headroom until the next refresh cycle.

Any type of company can leverage the solution, from smaller organizations to very large enterprises. The main difference is if there's a higher security environment, the solution requires more attention. However, it has the capability to handle any size of setup.

I've never directly spoken with technical support and therefore cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The solution is complex due to the fact that the salespeople from Palo Alto, or even from my firm will say, oh, we can just use this import wizard. However, that works to about a 60% level, and it does not do a complete import of Fortinet to Palo Alto or Cisco to a Palo Alto or Check Point to a Palo Alto.

That's where the complexity comes in. The customer thinks it's going to be easy. The salespeople said it's going to be easy. However, it really is not.

The time it takes to implement the solution is a hundred percent dependent upon the requirements of the solution. I've had firewalls taking six months to implement in a large retail environment and I've had also firewalls where you walk in and they give you just outbound requirements, and boom, it's up and out in two hours. That's why it really depends upon the complexity of the requirements.

The cost of the product is quite high.

I deal in list price. I don't get into discounting due to the fact that I do everything on a solution based on the list price. I have seen super heavy discounts from Palo Alto, however.

The licensing for Palo Alto is very straightforward. They include a lot in their base license. However, there may be features in there that are included and are buried in the base licensing cost that the customer will never use.

We're partners with Palo Alto. 

I'm dealing with all different versions of the solution and not necessarily just the most recent version. While most of what we work with is on-prem, many people are now moving to the cloud.

I would advise those considering the solution to ensure that they have a knowledgeable installer. That is critical. Most of ours that we take over are watched installs.

I rate the product at a nine out of ten. From a security/cost-benefit perspective, it's one of the best.

I am using Palo Alto Networks K2-Series as a perimeter firewall.

The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is its management abilities. Additionally, the updates are very good.

We had some issues with upgrading in the past. They could make the process easier.

Palo Alto Networks K2-Series has improved their central management but if they could improve upon it more that would be a great benefit.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks K2-Series for approximately 12 years.

The solution is very stable, we have had no issues.

We had some scalability issues with Palo Alto Networks K2-Series. I do not know how good the hardware firewalls are, but the cloud platform is scalable.

When we had some minor issues we were in contact with the technical support and they were very good. We have not used the support often.

The initial setup was easy.

When comparing Palo Alto Networks K2-Series with other solutions it is on the higher end of the price scale.

This solution is best suited for small to medium-sized businesses.

I rate Palo Alto Networks K2-Series a nine out of ten.

We use the solution to protect our network perimeter because we have some software products that have internet connectivity.

The most valuable features are the intuitive user interface, ease of use, and reporting.

They could improve by providing more features in the solution.

I have been using this solution for approximately one year.

The solution is stable. I have never had an issue using this solution since I started using it. I have not had any restarts or other troubles.

The solution is scalable but it depends on the hardware being used.

I have not needed to use the technical support since we have not had an issue.

The initial setup is easy.

I did the implementation myself.

The price of the solution is expensive. They should provide more features to match the high price of the solution.

I have evaluated Cisco and Fortinet firewalls solutions.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate Palo Alto Networks K2-Series a seven out of ten.

We use the firewalls to defend our perimeter and data center.

For me personally, the support, in general, is the feature I have found most valuable.

Palo Alto boasts a lot of great features that cover all markets from small businesses to large enterprises.

It's very easy to see everything on the dashboards. 

It would be nice if it could easily be integrated with Elasticsearch or Nagios for monitoring and reporting.

They should lower their prices for small businesses. They should offer subscriptions or box-sets because a lot of companies want to buy it, but they just can't afford it. 

It's not that expensive necessarily; the market is just doing poorly at the moment.

Everything I could possibly want has already been implanted into the new version, including the Internet of Things, machine learning, and SD-WAN; every feature I wanted has already been integrated.

I have been using this solution for roughly eight years.

Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is very stable. I've never had a problem with Palo Alto. The only problem we experienced with it was when the fan broke down — even then, it still kept on working without the fan. No harm was done and Palo Alto replaced it very quickly.

This solution is very scalable.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It only took us a few hours. On the other hand, deployment times vary. Sometimes it takes just a few hours, and other times, due to testing, it can take months. It's not complicated, but when you have to replace something, you have to consider the amount of testing before you put it into production.

We are the integrators.

I would recommend Palo Alto. With Cisco, when you engage Firepower, the performance decreases. Next generation functions with Palo Alto are much, much better. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Palo Alto Networks K2-Series a rating of ten.

You should always choose the best version of a solution. As your company grows, you will want to work with more power and better features.