Cisco Secure Network Analytics (Stealthwatch) vs Palo Alto Networks WildFire

• Using predefined signatures and scripts to capture and alert us to problems.
• Built-in tools that automatically watch for suspicious behaviors
• Integration with our already implemented IPAM services
• Interfaces with Splunk for our IT security to easy review

Read full review

• This is could base and easily manageable for our collocation. While working within the could can review in live time potential treats that it has reported from other devices.
• Worked very well with existing Palo Alto devices.
• Another huge plus is the simplicity of managing and ease of scalability.
• Its cost is competitive with similar/like products available.

Read full review

• As with new technologies, learning curves are a given. On this one, there is a slight curve before you fully grasp it.
• User interface can be improved to better user experience.

Read full review

• WildFire, like other sandboxes, has to stay up with malware sandbox evasion techniques, which necessitates larger file size limits.
• More file formats should be able to be submitted and scanned by WildFire, which needs improved initial administration and setup.
• It's quite pricey, and there's no warning choice for performance on the cloud.

Read full review

• StealthWatch helps other departments make decisions quickly based on NetFlow data.
• StealthWatch can bring a lot of reporting to the table that can be used to advance project necessities and prove data necessities to management.

Read full review

• Unknown file analysis helps with identifying malware that may not have a current signature.
• Additional visibility into files transferred across networks.

Read full review