Likelihood to Recommend It is well suited for large corporate entities, whether they are in manufacturing, sales, engineering, healthcare, supply or shipping. It is easy to understand and operate once it has been initially configured. Expansion of the system is likewise easy to do once expertise has been acquired. The only difficulty with this or any cloud scenario is ensuring where the data is located and managing that securely.
Read full review Malware that doesn’t leave files behind has become widely available. Anyone who can afford to reverse this trend should purchase technology. Application whitelisting isn’t for everyone, and Palo Alto Networks Traps can help. Enterprises looking for a low-affected, next-generation solution with high protection should consider it. PAN Traps is a great product at a reasonable price, and I highly recommend it.
Read full review Pros We are able to automate deployment which has been a strength to the geographical distribution of the enterprise. We have been able to work with a wider variety of developer tools and haven't had to customize to fit CloudCenter. It is easier for us to allocate space and allow users to take advantage of the system directly with a minimum of overhead. Read full review Direct Access to devices via Live Terminal which provides operations with scripting, triage, and preservation of artifacts. Behavioral Indicators of Compromise which provides alerts on events regarding groups of hosts and their signatures. Querying complex data sets involving a variety of devices for network connections, hashes, DNS, etc. Read full review Cons The software and systems don't present a problem to us but the continued interaction with mid-level support teams and vendors can slow down implementation or correction of difficulties we experience. The continued overhead associated with peripheral training on systems we have purchased can cause delays. Language barriers sometimes show up but this, again, is due to remote middle agents that are themselves contractors of or sales agents of the main agency. It slows down communication and can introduce business difficulties. Read full review Traps doesn't seem to function as a traditional A/V very well, so it's better as another layer to your endpoint protection Traps can cause issues with some legacy or custom programs, so exceptions may have to be made Traps falsely identifies things as malicious at times, this is not often though Read full review Usability Day to day, Cortex is easy to use when you have no alerts and when an agent upgrade doesn't go south. Alerts are far too "clicky", there's too many steps to drilling down to what actually happened to trigger an alert. Investigating alerts in Cortex takes about 5x longer than it should.
Read full review Support Rating The support we receive from Palo Alto is one of the best aspects of Traps. It is very easy to recommend their support. It seems much easier to connect directly with someone with a deep understanding of the product rather than other companies where you basically have to make an airtight case that it is some kind of non-standard issue that can't be solved with existing documentation. Palo Alto digs deep and helps with advanced troubleshooting to get things working.
Read full review Alternatives Considered We found that the cost advantages were greater by going with Cisco because of our present contracts and the materials and equipment we already had on hand. The reliability of the system, for us, outweighed any cost advantages we might have been realized by going with another provider. Certainly the service and support for the entire system is much better when handled by a single vendor with a good track record.
Read full review Traps is the slickest interface, easy to use and intuitive rule making, and the rest just didn't quite stack up to the performance level of Traps.
McAfee and Kaspersky just hog processor and RAM power. I didn't like the interface and functionality of
SentinelOne as much as Traps. Palo Alto really put a lot of time into the development of this software, and had some of the founding fathers of IT Security heading the development process. Can't beat that.
Read full review Return on Investment We have had a positive return on investment by adopting Cisco CloudCenter as the system is more mature than competitors. We have saved a lot by working with them rather than continuing to act as a defacto test location for other systems. We have been able to reduce the number of staff necessary to operate the system and turn them over to more profitable work. One negative impact we have seen is that it is difficult to map where the data is located at any specific instance. Read full review After putting Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR on a user's system, users came back with a positive response that there are no performance issues now. We are able to track and control granular suspicious and malicious activities. Web controls are missing, which if they would have been there would have been very helpful. Read full review ScreenShots