Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Reviews

We use Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks to scan the Kubernetes cluster.

We use Prisma Cloud's threat detection module.

We implemented Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks to help us address vulnerabilities within our Kubernetes cluster.

Prisma Cloud provides security in multi- and hybrid-cloud environments. It is a security console that is essential to our organization. We have implemented Prisma Cloud on the Kubernetes cluster for threat detection and vulnerability monitoring.

Prisma Cloud's security automation capabilities are good. Once integrated with our Kubernetes cluster, it automatically detects vulnerabilities and provides reports in the dashboard, which we can use to generate CSV formats to help our development team detect vulnerabilities.

Before implementing Prisma Cloud, we had difficulty preventing threats. After implementation, the vulnerabilities were resolved, and we now receive immediate notifications to help us prevent threats.

Prisma Cloud protects both our Azure and AWS cloud environments.

The most valuable features are vulnerability monitoring, serverless access, container runtime features, and Defender.

Prisma Cloud supports generating CSV files, but I would also like it to generate PDF files for reporting. 

I have been using Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks for two years.

Prisma Cloud has a stability rating of 99.99 percent.

The solution has very good performance 

The technical support is dedicated and they respond quickly.

We previously used Lacework, but we faced some licensing issues in our parent company, so we switched to Prisma Cloud.

The initial setup is straightforward and was completed by my manager and me.

Initially, we implemented it along with the vendor team, they guided us excellently.

Prisma Cloud's pricing is good.

We evaluated other solutions' costs and features.

I would rate Prisma Cloud a ten out of ten.

Twenty-four people monitor Prisma Cloud alerts each day in our organization, and any issues are sent to developers to be addressed.

Maintenance is required to upgrade the dashboard.

We use it for visibility, compliance, and governance. It is the official CSPM solution for our bank.

The only module we are using is the compliance module.

In Prisma Cloud, we were able to create frameworks using the RQL language, frameworks that are modeled after our Archer security baselines. Archer is the tool that we used to track all exceptions and security baselines. With Prisma Cloud we have been able to create custom baselines, based on the Archer framework that we have, and not just go off of CIS or NIST frameworks. 

We have also been able to generate reports for teams using the automated scripting tools that Prisma Cloud provides. On a weekly basis, we share those reports with the teams that are impacted. They go back and remediate their findings as needed, or we fine-tune the Prisma Cloud compliance language as needed if there is any ambiguity in there. 

Over the course of a few weeks, the teams remediate these issues and our compliance percentage goes up. Our compliance percentage for production environments was 95 percent. We then made some new acquisitions and they were at 40 or 50 percent, which was very bad. When we brought them under our company's umbrella, we gave them these reports, and they improved their compliance percentage. That has been helping us hugely.

Also, it does a good job of providing a view of our overall posture. Our confidence in our security and compliance posture was what I would describe as a "head in the sand" type of situation before. People would say, "Ah, we should be okay." But once we started digging into stuff and started putting our Archer baselines into the Prisma Cloud queries, that's when we realized that things looked poorer than we had imagined or assumed. This has been a wake-up call for our organization, and everybody has taken notice that we really have a hard job ahead of us.

In addition, with this solution we are seeing a single pane of glass to protect all of our cloud resources and appliances. We are seeing multiple occurrences with multiple platforms under one roof. That has really helped to simplify things.

Prisma Cloud does have some good investigation built into it. When an alert is generated, it does a good job at correlation, not the greatest in the world, but it gives you a good starting point. So it has helped us work on those alerts or investigate them more easily. It reduces our investigation time by 40 to 50 percent because it does all the initial investigation and puts all the findings together. You don't have to manually log into a lot of different accounts or tools to find out that information.

Financially, the only way I can think of that the solution has improved things is in our compliance structure. We spend less time after audits by putting in the effort beforehand. Recently, we have had a lot of good wins where audits have not been able to find a lot of issues. In the past, they used to find 15 or 16 findings, and now, they're able to find only one or two. When you have fewer audit findings, you have fewer man-hours dedicated to dealing with them. We are able to move those man-hours into our actual work rather than just audit work. We have been able to achieve some productivity there. I would estimate it has saved us 5 to 10 percent, in terms of money.

The most valuable feature is the option to add custom queries using the RQL language that they supply so that we can customize the compliance frameworks to what we need to look for.

The comprehensive view that it offers, the compliance percentage based on a framework for a particular account or a particular environment, is extremely useful. We can give those reports to the individual application teams so that they can remediate the findings. It also helps that we can give them read-only access, so we don't even get involved. They log in on their own and can pull a report, based on our instructions, and then do the remediation themselves. It helps us not be the middleman and not waste our time just generating reports for the application teams.

Also, Prisma Cloud provides security for multi and hybrid-cloud environments. We started off using it for our AWS environments, but now Azure and GCP are starting to come into play. We haven't started using those yet, we have just started initial discussions with them, but it has already been decided that Prisma Cloud would be the CSPM even for our Azure and GCP environments.

One definite area for improvement is the auto-remediation or the CWP area. 

The second one is the RQL language. It is still not very flexible and does not cover a lot of use cases. The RQL language could be dramatically improved to add more options. The cloud is adding more and more complexity in terms of number of services or the number of options for each service, especially when it comes to security options like encryption at rest and encryption in transit. And there is the issue of the interlinking of these services. One cloud service uses another cloud service, like CloudFront in front of a load balancer. These interactions are creating numerous new combinations and the RQL language really needs enhancement to handle those queries. 

We ourselves have put in a lot of enhancement requests to Palo Alto, looking at these corner cases, so they can look into those and improve them.

I have been using Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks for about two years.

Prisma Cloud is a little slow, but it is fairly stable.

It is a scalable solution. No matter how many accounts you add, it still can scale. Even the reports that we set up run pretty quickly. They have done a good job of making their platform scalable.

We have been acquiring companies quite a bit recently so we will be using Prisma Cloud heavily. This is our only company-approved CSPM tool. Even though we have some of the native tools in use, like Security Hub from AWS, or Azure Security Center, now called Defender for Cloud in Azure, the official CSPM is Prisma Cloud. It is the center of attraction for us so it is being used by everybody. In the future, we will be adding more accounts as needed until a decision is made on Wiz. We still have a good amount of time left in our Prisma Cloud contract, so we are not looking to switch to Wiz anytime soon.

Technical support is excellent. We have a dedicated account manager from Prisma Cloud who has an office hours session every Monday, and he also attends our standup calls. If Prisma Cloud has any new improvements or any updates that we might be interested in, he brings them up on those calls. We also have a weekly knowledge-sharing session where Prisma Cloud's personnel come in and make a 30-minute presentation and address the enhancement requests that we put in. They'll tell us what updates have happened, what improvements have happened, et cetera.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It was done by one of our team leads, who is a cloud security fellow. He used to be a senior cyber security engineer. It took him three months of full-time work to set up those compliance frameworks, the custom RQL queries based on our Archer baseline, and then, import all the accounts. The importing of the accounts is pretty straightforward. They provide an API or you can even import manually. That's not at all a problem.

We have 10 to 15 users in the solution. Four or five of us are from cloud security proper, and we have administrative rights. Our cloud operations team, seven or eight people, looks at the alerts and investigates and resolves them. They engage us if they need any assistance because they're not very cloud aware yet. And we have a few pilot users who are from the application teams, and they have a read-only role. They generate a report for themselves. Many people still want spoon-feeding and say, "Can you generate a report for us or give us a screenshot of this and that?" We do that occasionally, but we are trying to move away from that process.

For maintenance, there are only two of us, and one of us is doing it full-time, more or less. The other one is more of a standby. We are documenting the procedures. We do weekly maintenance in Prisma Cloud, where we make sure the users are onboarded, there are no stale users, and take care of the general upkeep of the tool. The idea is that, in the future, we'll probably get a junior engineer for that role, while the senior engineer can perform enhancements or more advanced configurations.

When it comes to protecting the full cloud-native stack, Prisma Cloud is fairly okay. Compared to other tools out there, I don't think it is an extremely good product, but it's a reasonably okay product to work with. I've used Wiz in the past, and Wiz does a better job on full native-cloud security.

For example, there is the auto-remediation feature in Wiz, which Prisma Cloud eventually caught up to. Wiz also has agentless scanning that Prisma Cloud is, again, catching up to. There is also Terraform code scanning for CI/CD pipelines that Wiz came up with, ISC code scanning, et cetera. Those are some of the excellent features of Wiz.

Wiz also offers granular compliance frameworks in the sense that you could write your own compliance queries and make them part of a framework. Prisma Cloud's RQL is not that flexible. We are still running into some issues in some corner cases where there are no RQL queries available.

Prisma Cloud's security automation capabilities are very basic. Prisma Cloud is primarily a CSPM, not a CWPP. Even Wiz does not offer that many automation capabilities; they were coming out just at the end of the last year. But compared to other products that I have worked with, which are purely CWPP, Prisma Cloud would not even come close.

I would rate Prisma Cloud at about six out of 10 for helping to take a preventative approach to cloud security. It gets the job done. Our company has invested money in it, so we can't move away from it for another two or three years. But we are already piloting Wiz to see if we like it. Once the contract with Prisma Cloud is up, we will probably jump to Wiz. That's the idea within the company.

If I were to rate Prisma Cloud from one to 10, I would maybe rate it at six, while Wiz would be a nine.

We have started using some of the modules for securing the entire cloud-native development cycle across build, deploy, and run, but we have not really operationalized them. They're in the initial phases. It's not the maturity of Prisma Cloud that's in question, it's about the maturity of our company as a whole. Our company was not really tuned to CI/CD, secure DevOps, and the like, so we are slowly starting to integrate that. We haven't seen the results yet, but I would say it's very promising on that front at this time.

My advice would be to compare other products and understand what you want to do before you purchase or implement it.

We use this solution to detect misconfigurations in the cloud. It's a multi-cloud solution, so if you're running a multi-cloud environment like Azure, AWS, and GCP, you only need to deploy a single solution. It assists with improving the security posture of an organization.

I use CSPM and CWPP. The previous organization I worked for used both, but the company I work for now only uses CSPM. I've also worked with code security.

We recently acquired this solution, so it has slowly started gaining momentum in my organization.

This solution provides us with a single tool to protect all of our cloud resources and applications without having to manage and reconcile different security and compliance reports. It's a single solution for everything in a multi-cloud environment.

It enhances operations, but it's a pretty measurable tool. It provides comprehensive visibility.

It provides risk clarity at runtime across the entire pipeline and shows issues as they are discovered during the build phases. 

The modules in CSPM and CWPP are visibility, compliance governance, threat detection, data security, host security, container security, serverless security, web application, and API security. This is an additional cost, so I don't think any organization uses all of the modules.

I previously worked for a health organization that was using this solution. They were able to get certified in HITRUST using this product.

Our developers are able to correct issues using the tools they use to code.

The CSPM and CWPP functionalities are pretty good. It depends on what kind of data you have in your cloud, your workload, and some other factors. If you're doing a lot of containers, you need CWPP models. If you just do regular cloud contributions, then you can use CSPM.

It provides security spanning multi and hybrid-cloud environments. My current organization's goal is to migrate to the cloud eventually. If that's your organization's goal, you need to have some kind of security mechanism or protection in place to make sure that the resources you're building in the cloud are built for the best security practices and are free of misconfiguration vulnerabilities. 

When we deploy containers in any cloud, the runtime protection is really good. If a container is running any kind of application, it can detect a cryptomining attack. The solution also provides File Integrity Monitoring testing.

It has various models and provides comprehensive visibility. It shows us how our assets are performing in any of our clouds. It gives us a holistic view of our native cloud environment, and we can also fine-tune the policies for our architecture.

The modules help us take a preventative approach to cloud security. Flow Logs provide a real-time assessment of our network.

It recently integrated with another company called Checkov. It checks all the misconfigurations that a developer could make during the build phase. This means that whenever we're building any kind of application or deploying any application, it will detect it right away. We can integrate it into our CI/CD pipeline or with any other Jenkins plugins. I tested those use cases as well. The solution has improved since they integrated the product with Checkov.

It provides good visibility. In terms of controls, it depends on how you want to do it. Sometimes, you need to be specific in terms of controls. With runtime detection, it's going to be more powerful. We're confident that our assets are secure.

The solution is capable of integrating security into our CI/CD pipeline and adding touch points into existing DevOps processes. We don't have the option to leverage it, but I have tested it in my previous organization.

This solution is more AWS and Azure-centric. It needs to be more specific on the GCP side, which they are working on.

I have been using this solution for about two and a half years.

The solution is reliable.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is very helpful. I would rate them a nine out of ten. We have a weekly cadence.

Positive

The setup was very easy and straightforward. We haven't set up the automation perspective. We're still testing it, so we haven't leveraged it yet.

The setup didn't take very long, but it will be different for every organization. If your cloud architect team is willing to deploy with you, it shouldn't take more than a week. It also depends on how large the organization is and how many subscriptions are in the cloud environment.

We don't need to maintain anything on the console side.

We used an integrator from Palo Alto. They were very good and offered great support.

The solution is pretty expensive. It all depends on the organization's goals and needs.

The cost depends on the pricing model. Compared to other solutions, the cost isn't that bad.

I compared the solution to other security products like Fortinet, Lacework, and Security Command Center.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

Those who want to use this solution, need to understand the concept behind this product and get to know their own environment first. The solution will give you holistic visibility of your assets, which will show you what needs to be fixed. Security comes with an expense, so it depends on what you want to leverage and where.

I'm still testing the automation capabilities because my organization is specific to one cloud. They were more aggressive on Azure and AWS Prisma Cloud, but now they are considering GCP customers as well.

We're still in POC mode for continuous security that comes under runtime protection. I can't 100% guarantee that it reduces runtime alerts.

We had Azure, AWS, and a little bit of GCP, so we gave Prisma read access to all those accounts, subscriptions, etc., and monitored the alerts to mitigate risks based on what popped up in the dashboard.

While it's not our only tool, Prisma is managing about 80 percent. We still occasionally go into cloud-native tools to ensure certain compliance standards are being met. Sometimes, urgent issues need to be fixed that haven't been reported in Prisma because the native tools will catch them first. As a third-party solution, Prisma might take a little longer to build a report directory.

We had around 30 to 40 users who were a mix of cloud and DevOps engineers. There were also members of the security team who made decisions about what kind of security policies we had to follow. We used it extensively within the public cloud across all our Azure, AWS, and GCP subscriptions and projects. There was interest in using it on-premises with our vSphere environment as well. I don't know if that ever happened.

Prisma enabled us to get up-to-speed on enforcing TLS 1.2. It helped us look at different types of resources, like storage accounts and app services. I'm thinking particularly of Azure because that was my focus. I found all the resources from the Prisma list and remedied those issues so that they were displayed as resolved in Prisma.

It gave us visibility into and control over complex cloud environments, which helped us feel better about our security and secure the environment with the clinical data. Our security team was pleased when we showed them clean Prisma reports. It boosted their confidence and their comfort level that we were being compliant.

Prisma made it much easier to ensure that all of the security pieces are handled. It simplified our security issue resolution. It cut down our investigation time by giving us one place to look. It cleaned up our operations considerably because finding what resources needed to be resolved, mitigated, or updated was easier. It probably saved us several hours every week. It also saved us some money, but I couldn't quantify the savings because other environments also used it.

It helped us develop a preventative approach to security. Nine out of ten times, we could find issues that needed to be fixed ahead of time. We had a monthly meeting where we would review the high-severity alerts on the dashboard and assign people to remedy them. Once we got through the high severity alerts, we looked at mediums and low severity alerts. Prisma enabled us to identify resources we needed to fix, which was quite handy.

We were pleased with Prisma's custom and built-in reports. We could go into the dashboard and see all these notifications telling us which subscriptions didn't have TLS 1.2 enabled. The security controls were the most valuable features. 

Prisma's multi-cloud capabilities were essential. We wouldn't have used it without them. We would have just used the native cloud vendors' security solutions. Its protection of our full cloud-native stack is pretty comprehensive. I would rate it at least an eight out of ten. It stacks up well compared to the security alerts and notifications we got from solutions like Defender.

It sometimes took Prisma a little while to build queries, so new services or features wouldn't appear. It wouldn't get flagged in Prisma for a bit. It would be helpful if they sped up how quickly they got their default notifications, queries, and alerts.

The access controls for our bank roles were not granular enough. We needed specific people to do particular actions, and we often had to give some people way too much access for them to be able to do what they needed in Prisma. They couldn't do their jobs if they didn't have that level of access, so other people had to do that part for them. It would help to have more granular role-based access controls.

We used the solution for about three years at my previous company. 

Prisma seemed highly stable, but I wasn't managing the solution. I was more of a user.

Prisma seemed to scale pretty well. It covered several large environments and didn't seem to struggle when loading information for us. I think it did well.

I rate Palo Alto support a six out of ten. The support was adequate, but I can't say it was great. If we had an issue with a feature or a query, it could take them a little while to get back, especially if it was a feature improvement or a new alert. They were very slow to add new warnings and features.

Neutral

The company never had a public cloud solution before Prisma, but they had something for on-prem. I don't know what it was. They also used cloud-native solutions like Defender for Cloud and the native tool for AWS.

We switched to Prisma because we wanted a single pane of glass that would allow the security team to see security issues across all of the public cloud vendors that we used, so they wouldn't have to jump to each individual cloud vendor's tool.

I was involved in the POC several years ago. It was like a lab test. After we tested that for several months, we rolled out the official one. At that point, I was just helping them test as they tried out the product. I didn't actually install the software.

The setup seemed pretty straightforward. There were clear instructions on how we just needed to create service principles with specific permissions and then grant Prisma the credentials for the service. I think they only had about five people maintaining the Prisma environment, and each was responsible for bits and pieces of it.

I believe the company saw a return using Prisma.

I know that the guys who handled the pricing said Prisma was costly, but I don't know how that compares to other products.

I know the team evaluated other options, but I wasn't involved.

I rate Prisma Cloud an eight out of ten. Having one place to go for all of your security alerts and notifications makes it easier to solve issues than going to each vendor's security tool.

We are a system integrator. My organization has a cloud practice, and we focus on cloud security. Predominantly, Prisma Cloud is used to identify misconfigurations in the cloud.

We have been using Prisma Cloud for two specific customers on Azure Cloud. It is quite a new organization, and we currently have two customers, but in my previous organization, we had about eight customers.

We predominantly focus only on the cloud. We don't work with hybrid models. MultiCloud is there, but we haven't worked on MultiCloud as of now. This specific region is more into Azure Cloud. Azure has a data center over here. Therefore, the adoption of AWS or Google is not high in this region. For data compliance, customers want to stick to a cloud vendor that has a data center in this region.

My 18 years of experience is purely in serving the US and Europe markets. I am quite new to the UAE and the gulf region, and I found that this region is not very mature when it comes to cloud security. The majority of the CISOs are not aware of cloud security controls that need to be implemented, and they only speak about traditional security such as EDR, endpoint security, DLP, etc. So, there is a big potential for cloud security, specifically at the containers and serverless layer.

When we evaluated solutions, we carried out PoC not only for two customers but also for the other six accounts, and they were pretty shocked to know that there were a lot of misconfigurations in the cloud. This region lacks cloud security skills, and there are not many cloud security experts or solution architects to design proper architecture. When we carried out the PoC, they became aware of the misconfigurations and security gaps. It helped them to identify the potential risks they have in the cloud. Generally, with security, it is not easy to measure the outcome or gain from a solution because it purely depends on the breach and the data loss, but so far, we have helped two organizations in fully implementing the solution, and the other four are still in the PoC process.

We purely focus on the container and serverless security, and we predominantly work with Cloud Posture Management (CPM). We opted for Prisma Cloud because we found Prisma Cloud to be better in terms of the overall posture and integration. There are other products in the market, but they don't have a complete and broad portfolio range when it comes to containers or serverless functions. Prisma Cloud has good integrations. You can integrate vulnerability management for the overall risk score. When it comes to commercials, costing-wise also, it is far more reasonable for the customers.

It is good for helping us to take a preventative approach to cloud security. It identifies all the controls and gives an overall picture. For example, it tells us the portion that has misconfiguration. So, we can fix that portion. It is a very good preventative tool. Certain customers predominantly use it for one-time assessments, which I don't recommend. It should be an ongoing assessment to have a good incident response as soon as an alert comes in. Normally, people just ask for a weekly report or monthly report to identify their security posture. Instead of that, they should have a real-time incident response solution to act as a preventative tool. As soon as an alert is generated, there must be someone to immediately work on it, and having such a tool really helps.

It provides the visibility and control we need. In my previous organization, we had quite a complex environment with about 30 Kubernetes clusters. As compared to other tools, it provided better insights, but I haven't evaluated it for much more complex architectures. When it comes to serverless architectures, our work has been minimal. Therefore, I cannot confirm or guarantee whether Prisma Cloud will satisfy a highly complex environment.

It gives the overall picture of compliance when it comes to the cloud security portion. We also have a couple of custom dashboards wherein we integrate the security risk score from other tools. Before implementing this solution for the customers, there was no proper mechanism for the cloud. They only had the vulnerability management reports, the SIEM score, or the application VAPT reports, but they did not have any visibility to anything on the cloud in terms of overall compliance and container security. It definitely gave visibility to the CISOs. A lot of people are still concerned about whether the cloud is secure, whether they need to migrate to it, and whether they have proper security controls for containers and serverless security. It gives better exposure to them. We do have proper tools with CISO-enabled dashboards using which they'll be able to see the score. 

It has reduced runtime alerts by 60% to 70%. 

It has reduced the alert investigation time. False positives are reduced. So, we are able to focus on what has been highlighted. At certain times, we need to accept certain changes, and it also gives us the flexibility to mark something as safe. Based on the change control, we can disable the alert so that the alert is not repeated until the change is completed. We have the functionality to do it.

The container and serverless security is most valuable. It is quite a new technology for this region. Even though containers have been there for a long time, the adoption of containers is very minimal in this region. When it comes to using Kubernetes containers in a complex architecture, there is a lack of security in the market. People aren't aware of the security controls or the process for governance. Container security provided by Prisma Cloud is quite good at filling that gap.

We identified two things that we felt would be great to have, but they are under NDA. So, I can't disclose them. Other than those two things, we identified a generic bug in the secret key management service on AWS that needs to be fixed. We reported it to them, and we want them to fix it.

It is very good with predominant cloud vendors, such as AWS, Azure, and GCP, but I am not sure about its efficiency when it comes to other cloud vendors. They should expand its coverage to other cloud vendors such as Alibaba Cloud and Oracle Cloud, which are quite common in this region. I am not sure if they have a full-fledged Oracle Cloud controls evaluation. If they can improve it in terms of the MultiCloud aspect for the organization, it will be helpful, especially in this region.

I have been working with this solution for almost three years. In my previous organization, I worked with it for two years, and it has been about eight months since I joined my current organization. Here also, we have opted for Prisma Cloud.

Its stability is good. We didn’t have any issues with it.

In my earlier organization, we used it for a bigger client with about 3,000 VMs in AWS and about 30 to 40 clusters. We did not have any challenge with its scalability. As we started putting things, it was working well. 

In this organization, we only have two small customers. There is not much workload. We haven't had any issues. It works fine.

In my earlier organization, I worked directly with Prisma Cloud support. Their support was good. My engagement was minimal, but the initial support from them was quite good. When I had some RFCs and RFIs coming in, their turnaround times were quite less. We had a very good rapport with them. We had a specific account manager who handled any RFCs and PoCs. Their support was good, and we didn't have any challenges. 

In this organization, we have been working with a channel partner, and there have been a few challenges because they are also occupied with other proposals and tasks. The same partner also works with other competitor organizations. Overall, I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

In my previous organization, we were using the Skyhigh networks. Earlier, it was Sky network, and later on, McAfee acquired it and made it a CASB and cloud posture management product. We had a couple of challenges with it. So, we evaluated a lot of products and shortlisted Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. 

It is straightforward. They provide two options. You can configure it manually or just grant access. It can then easily sync up. They also provide the cloud formation templates to spin up in minutes. So, it is straightforward and very simple.

It is hard to measure cost savings at this time because it is quite a new investment for the organization. Cost savings will be there in terms of security and reducing the development time and error fixing time, but it will take some time to measure that.

Its price is reasonable as compared to other products. The main challenge is explaining the licensing model to customers. It isn't a problem related to Palo Alto. Commonly, people don't understand cloud licensing or security licensing. When they have fixed virtual machines, they know what they are going to be charged, but when it comes to cloud automation, it is hard for them to get clarity in case of high workloads or when they have enabled auto-scaling, etc. It would be helpful if Palo Alto can educate people on their licensing programs.

We evaluated multiple products after I came into this organization. We evaluated various CSPM and container security products, such as Aqua Security and Rapid7.

Nowadays, every vendor has come up with a cloud posture management tool. So, we carried out a couple of PoCs in specific customer accounts that had an almost similar type of infrastructure, and based on the outcome, we found Prisma Cloud to be better in terms of identification of miscontrols and security. The cost also played a major role. As compared to other products, it was reasonable. So, the feature set for fulfilling customer requirements and the cost were the two factors that played a major part.

The third factor was the flexibility to work with the vendor. In terms of partnership and support, we felt that being a Palo Alto product, Prisma Cloud would be better. Palo Alto has better service over here, and their channel partners are quite flexible to work with on initial customer demonstration and other things. We felt much more comfortable with Prisma Cloud in all these three aspects.

When it comes to its security automation capabilities, currently, not every customer prefers to automate. We have been trying to implement automation, and when the right access was given, we did a certain amount of automation to immediately block the firewall rules or revoke access when any privileged access has been given. We have been doing a little bit of automation, and it has been good. We are able to achieve our goals. Out of two customers in this company and eight customers in my previous company, only three customers preferred to do automation to a certain extent. The rest of them wanted the alerts to be sent to the incident response team of their SOC. They wanted their team to act upon them. They only allowed us to automate high severity ones or highly critical ones. For example, they only allowed us to automate things like immediately blocking access to specific ports or IPs, but we haven't tried the automation to a full extent.

It enables you to integrate security into your CI/CD pipeline and add touchpoints into existing DevOps processes. We implemented it for just one use case. Before that, we were using Qualys Container Security in the CI/CD pipeline. After switching to Prisma Cloud, I did not have an opportunity to evaluate it completely because I moved to another organization. In my previous organization, we had expertise in DevOps. We had a dedicated DevOps team with almost six years of experience in automating the entire deployment of servers infrastructure, as well as applications. It was pretty easy for them to implement or integrate any security tool into the CI/CD pipeline. In my current organization, we don't have an expert team, and we struggle a bit in implementing things because there are multiple CI/CD deployments from Jenkins to Amazon's native one and Git. So, we take support from Palo Alto to get things deployed during the PoCs. In my previous organization, it was also easier for us to implement because the training provided from the Palo Alto side was quite good, and we had a lot of training materials in the partner portal. We utilized them. We got in touch with the technical team, and we implemented things quite faster, but here, there is a bit of lag because we don't have expertise in DevOps for implementations or integrations.

It can provide risk clarity at runtime and across the entire pipeline, showing issues as they are discovered during the build phases. Shifting your security to the left cuts down the entire life cycle of application deployment, and it does help to fix the security issues at the beginning of the development life cycle itself. We have not seen a large amount of time being cut down. That's because, typically, teams deploy the code, and then initiate a security scan. By integrating these things into the early development cycle, the time can be cut down to three weeks from about one and half months.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We wanted to use Prisma Cloud as a CSPM. The company needed a single pane of glass to monitor our AWS and Azure environments and see where we were in terms of configuration drift, vulnerabilities, etc. 

We're pretty AWS-heavy, so we wanted to see where we stood among all our AWS accounts. We wanted to keep an eye on all that, have a one-stop job, and maybe even offload some of our work. The company wanted to integrate with our Splunk instance to pair our SIEM logs with the CSPM. Most of it was for compliance tracking and vulnerability.

We tested everything out. We were building our own standards, but we also needed to adhere to IRS Publication 1075. They had that natively in their tool, but we could custom-build it.

I thought Prisma was great. It was robust and had many capabilities. We saw most of what we were looking for. The benefit was pretty easy and pretty quick. Prisma is a top-notch product. If they could make it agentless in the Windows stuff we needed and monitor the private cloud, we would have gone with Prisma. Prisma works perfectly with the cloud tools we have. 

I like Prisma's multi-cloud capabilities. It supports the big four cloud providers: AWS, Azure, GCP, and Alibaba. That was critical. We have mixed environments, so it's important to monitor all of that. We don't have much going on in Azure, but we will. We are predominantly AWS.

Prisma was extremely comprehensive. It's easy to drill down to gather more information and keep going. It seemed like you could drill down forever to see what the vulnerability was linked to. 

They had a MITRE ATT&CK attack map that told me here's the vulnerability, issue, or threat. In several instances, it would provide remediation options. If you had it linked up and fully integrated with AWS, it could handle the remediation for you. Otherwise, it would lay out the whole steps and provide the AWS CLI commands to resolve those issues, which was cool. We loved it. 

Runecast gave us more visibility into VMware's private cloud. We have more environments there, but Prisma's lack of visibility into the private cloud was a downside—there weren't many. 

We tested Prisma Cloud out for about a month and a half to compare it to Runecast to see which works better for us.

Prisma's price is pretty high, but it's a good product, and you get what you paid for, especially if you're working in a containerized environment.

We looked at Runecast and Prisma. We did not go with Prisma because Runecast could deploy agentless to our VMware private cloud, and we were impressed with this capability. Prisma looked polished, but Runecast could monitor the private cloud, which was a big thing for us. 

Vulnerability control is one of the things we're working on right now. It'd be great if we could find a product that can help with it. One issue we're having is that the latest data model we use to build out our products is domainless. We can't use Nessus, which is all on a domain, for vulnerability management on our private cloud.

We've tested out agents through the Defender for Endpoint and other things, but they don't handle the load that we have. This was going to help detect vulnerabilities in that environment. Unfortunately, Prisma wasn't able to work in the private Cloud. They were more focused on containerization and Kubernetes, so we ended up going with Runecast.

I rate Palo Alto Prisma nine out of 10. I recommend it. It's polished and a great product. Unfortunately, it didn't fit our use case, but I think their use case is pretty normal for most.

Our primary use case for this solution is for CWP, CSPM, and scanning for run time. We also use it for monitoring mode and pipeline integration.

This solution has helped our organization by allowing us to have all the products integrated with the service now. This solution helped us by allowing us to schedule and fix things. This is not an easy thing if you're managing 1,000 plus resources.

The most valuable feature for me is the CSPM.

I think Prisma Cloud could improve its preventive governance policy and CWP run time modules.

I have been using this solution for about three years. 

I would say that this solution provides security spending in multi and hybrid cloud environments.

Regarding the comprehensiveness of this solution for protecting the full cloud-native stack, I would say that CSPM is suitable for postal security management, but other than that, there are a lot of pros and cons. We cannot say for 100% that this works for everything on the cloud.

Regarding Prisma Cloud, I would say it has helped us take a preventive approach to cloud security and that it works quite well.

Prisma Cloud provides the visibility and control that we need in the network overall, but the levels of visibility and control vary depending on the module. We need to have the solution integrated with the different tolls, which is quite complex. Our confidence in security and compliance postures is good overall in terms of complaints.

Prisma Cloud has enabled us to integrate security into our Ci/CD pipeline and as touch points into existing DevOps processes. When it comes to the seamlessness of the dash points in our DevOps and touchpoints, there are pros and cons, but a lot of the things have to do with the vendor itself and that's where the challenge is. The integrations are critical because we need to have a lot of talks with Prisma to sort out all those issues.

When it comes to this solution providing us with a single tool to protect our cloud resources and applications without having to manage our security and the compliance report, I would say it's fine with the organization. We plan to move in the future when we move the workloads into the cloud more and more, and we will think about it when we see how it will behave with more workloads and that's when we will discuss it all.

Prisma Cloud provides risk clarity at runtime across the entire pipeline showing issues as they are discovered during the billing basis. But other tools have more capability than Prisma for governance policies. Our developers can correct Prism's governance policies using the tools they use to code and only once they have indicated the safety pipeline, they will get the others to make it a bit more visible and fix vulnerabilities before moving to production.

We are currently using almost all modules of this solution.

I would say that Prisma Cloud has helped us reduce runtime alerts.

I would say that Prisma Cloud has helped us save money because it allows us to have information on the threat before it happens.

I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

Prisma protects our workloads and provides network security for our containers. Our infrastructure is mostly Azure-based and entirely on the cloud. We use the Prisma Compute and Prisma Network Security modules.

We have multiple security tools like Prisma, but not the same use cases. Prisma has its own unit use cases like image scanning, repository scanning, or container scanning. We have other tools as well, but they have different use cases.

We have about 15 users. Some are DevOps, infrastructure, and security engineers. There are also a few SOC analysts. I believe we'll expand usage in the coming years if everything goes well with other customers.

Before implementing Prisma Cloud, we didn't have any visibility into workspaces like Kubernetes and the underlying network of containers. Now, we have a better understanding of the resources interacting with Kubernetes and can identify vulnerabilities across the organization. In the past, we had limited information to take action on those resources, but now we can better understand the risks.

The solution has had a significant impact on our organization, especially our governance team. Once we get reports on non-compliant resources, we must take action before going live. We need to implement a risk-based approach to handle those non-compliant resources. Prisma offers a better understanding of whether the resources comply with regulations.

Prisma reduced runtime alerts by about 500 or something. We still get those because we're in the operational stage, but it's only a few. It has cut our average alert investigation times by about two days. Prisma probably saves us eight to ten hours total each week. 

I found the network queue sets useful. I also liked the Workload Protection Module, the vulnerability findings, and how the rule sets handle the vulnerabilities based on severity.

Prisma was easy to adopt in our CI/CD pipeline, but we only use it to scan the images for the last push in the CI. On the CD side, we use it for the assessment, like the pull and push. 

Prisma's notifications aren't up to industry standards. Also, Prisma is a bit harder to integrate than other tools. The deployment and onboarding are plug-and-play, but somewhat hard to handle in terms of integration with external operations tools. The product design isn't up to the current standard. I would recommend having higher standards in terms of integration with other tools, especially operationalized tools.

The product could better integrate business logs and runtime notifications from Enforcer and Network Security Module. I would recommend better visibility and integration for any violations.

I have been using Prisma for a year.

Prisma is stable.

We haven't used Prisma at scale. It hasn't grown since we deployed. We have four clusters but haven't added anything. We still keep the four clusters. We didn't add anything. In the coming months, we'll replicate this with other customers once we see that the solution is stable. 

Prisma's support was helpful. I rate them nine out of ten. 

Positive

We've never had another solution for this specific use case. This is the first. 

Some modules are straightforward to deploy, but others are a bit complex. End-to-end deployment of the modules and the whole network took approximately four months.

The Prisma team helped us in this deployment. The team helped us learn while implementing it. 

We've seen a return by reducing risks from cyberattacks and compliance issues. 

I recommend knowing the number of licenses you need for your operations and your expected workloads before signing a license agreement. There are no hidden costs as far as I know.

We looked at some solutions to improve security posture and risk management. Prisma was the product that had the capabilities we need in our price range.

I rate Prisma Cloud seven out of ten. Before you implement Prisma or any other solution, you need to ensure you have all the tools you need in place and know if it will fit into your current environment.

I work with Palo Alto products, including their firewalls, VM-Series, CM-Series, hardware, and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. I recommend Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks primarily for financial services, FSI, and energy companies.

The threat detection feature in Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks integrates with cloud-native controls like AWS GuardDuty and similar services on Azure and GCP. It also brings its own threat intelligence from Unit 42 and supports external intel feeds like VirusTotal. Multi-cloud compliance monitoring leads to a normalized view and can reduce workforce requirements.

The cost of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is too high. I would also appreciate the addition of NLP to reduce the learning curve and make configuring queries more user-friendly.

I have been working with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks since it was called RedLock in 2019.

The initial setup is straightforward. Day zero involves cloud integration following an admin guide. Day one involves policy tuning, customization, and configuring compliance policies like GDPR.

The ROI is challenging to quantify. While there is tangible reduction in workforce needed, exact cost savings cannot be easily measured.

Pricing and licensing are expensive. There are different experiences with ROI, and exact cost benefits are hard to quantify.

If you have a multi-cloud environment, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is essential for reducing costs and normalizing outputs. In a single-cloud, limited setup with good automation, you might not need it. I rate the overall solution at seven to seven and a half.

Our primary use cases are for container security and for auditing purposes. 

We have multiple clusters. 

Palo Alto enables us to know what security threats are happening in the background. 

It provides the visibility and control we need regardless of how complex or distributed our cloud environment becomes.

Prisma Cloud provides us with a single tool to protect all of our cloud resources and applications, like what we need to manage and reconcile security and compliance reports.

We have been enabled to reduce runtime.  

Prisma Cloud provides risk clarity at runtime and across the entire pipeline. It shows issues as they're discovered during the build phases.

The most valuable features are code security and container security.

It gives us awareness about any security breaches and if there are any vulnerabilities. 

Palo Alto provides security scanning for multi and hybrid cloud environments. We need to know where there is a threat. Palo Alto monitors and reports it.

It can be integrated into any alerting tool that has enough automation and capability. It can pull some of the metrics without an agent.

Prisma Cloud provides risk clarity at runtime and across the entire pipeline, like, showing issues as they're discovered during the build phases.

There are some operational issues but testing it is good. 

The UI is the worst. 

I have been using Palo Alto Networks for two years.

The stability is good. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

The scalability is good. 

Their technical support isn't on an expert level. They need to improve. 

Neutral

The deployment time takes around two to four weeks. The understanding of the product takes around six months.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

It does not require regular maintenance. You need to do maintenance around every six months by updating the agent. 

I would rate Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks a seven out of ten.