The focused Palo Alto alternative — the 98% you actually use.
Palo Alto is a genuinely best-in-class enterprise security platform. If you truly need that full breadth, it is the right call. But a cloud workload firewall rarely uses most of it — and you still pay for all of it: a base hourly plus per-GB traffic plus a per-GB charge for every threat add-on plus a separate management plane. Enforza is the ~98% a cloud team actually needs — egress, ingress and east-west control, identity-aware L7 without decrypting TLS, secure NAT and compliance — at a flat per-firewall price.
When Palo Alto is the right call
Palo Alto is a genuinely excellent, best-in-class enterprise security platform with deep threat prevention — and we do not claim to take it on or match its breadth. If your security model truly needs full deep packet inspection, lab-validated threat prevention across many protocols, and a broad platform spanning network and beyond, Palo Alto is the right call, and this page will not pretend otherwise. The honest question on the rest of this page is a narrower one: does a cloud workload firewall actually need all of that — or is most of it breadth you will half-fill and fully pay for?
A platform you half-fill, at full platform price
Three things are worth thinking through before you license an enterprise platform to do a cloud-network firewall's job. None of them is a knock on Palo Alto — they are questions about fit.
-
Half used, fully paid for
An enterprise NGFW carries hundreds of switches, and the pricing stacks: a base hourly, plus per-GB traffic, plus a per-GB charge for every threat add-on you enable, plus a separate management plane — quote-gated, not a clean number. Most of those switches a cloud workload firewall never turns on. You still pay for them. Are they things your cloud requires, or breadth that is there because it sounds impressive?
-
Deep inspection means decrypting your TLS
Most of the deep-packet-inspection and advanced threat features need TLS/SSL decryption to work — which means key custody, a man-in-the-middle on your own traffic, apps that break, and real ongoing management: cert distribution, exclusion lists, upkeep. Enforza does identity-aware L7 by SNI and FQDN without decrypting TLS and without holding your keys — less risk, far less to run.
-
Cloud is service-to-service, not the end user
Cloud traffic is overwhelmingly service-to-service and human-to-service — APIs and applications, not end-user-device security. Securing the end user belongs on the user's own device, the endpoint, not on a firewall sitting in your network. A large part of a mega-NGFW's breadth is user-centric, solving a problem that is not your cloud egress and east-west problem.
One firewall, four meters, a quote — or one flat line
Palo Alto Cloud NGFW bills on several meters at once, and the threat features that are the whole reason to buy it each add their own charge on top. There is no single clean price at the point of decision — it routes through an estimator and a sales motion. Enforza is one flat per-firewall licence, no per-GB tax, every included feature already on.
- Rate
- ~$1.50 / hr · +$0.50/hr per additional AZ
- Rate
- ~$0.065 / GB (tiers down at scale)
- Rate
- ~$0.30–0.60 / hr + ~$0.013–0.026 / GB · each
- Rate
- ~$0.30–0.45 / hr
Base hourly · per-GB traffic · a per-GB charge for every threat add-on · a separate management plane · multiplied per Availability Zone — quote-gated, not a number on the page.
- Per firewall
- £179 / mo
- Per GB
- $0 / GB
Flat, per-firewall licence — £149 from your sixth. No per-GB tax, no per-add-on meter. Plus the Linux VM you already run.
Palo Alto Cloud NGFW rates are DIRECTIONAL, dated 2026-06-14, from their
published estimator / docs (AWS rate card dated 2025-12-12) — verify your
own numbers.
Enforza is GBP per firewall; the comparison is to a multi-meter,
quote-gated model, so no single exact monthly bill is claimed.
We do not match Palo Alto's threat-prevention breadth, and do not price as
if we do.
Enforza vs Palo Alto — including where Palo Alto wins
Here is the honest, row-by-row breakdown — including where Palo Alto wins. We group it three ways: 5 rows where the two are the same on the cloud-firewall job, 9 where Enforza leads on cost, focus and posture, and 5 where Palo Alto is genuinely the stronger choice. We do not claim to match its breadth — and we say so on every row where it leads.
- Parity Parity on the cloud job
- Enforza advantage Enforza is the stronger choice
- Palo Alto advantage Palo Alto is the stronger choice
| Capability | Enforza | Palo Alto | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stateful L3–L7 filtering | Stateful inspection across L3/L4 and L7, egress and ingress | Stateful next-generation firewall with deep L7 inspection | Same |
| Identity-aware / application-aware control | Identity-aware L7 by SNI and FQDN for outbound control | App-ID and URL classification for application-aware policy | Same |
| Egress, ingress and east-west | Inspects egress, ingress and east-west lateral traffic in one NVA | North-south and east-west inspection across the cloud estate | Same |
| Secure NAT | Secure source NAT and destination NAT on the appliance | NAT supported as part of the firewall policy | Same |
| Runs across multiple clouds | One control plane across AWS, Azure, Google Cloud and on-prem VMs | Cloud NGFW and VM-Series span the major clouds | Same |
| Cost model | Flat, per-firewall licence — £179/mo (£149 from your sixth) | Base hourly + per-GB traffic + per-GB per add-on + management, quote-gated | Enforza |
| Pay for what you use | One firewall, every included feature on — nothing half-filled | Full platform priced whether or not your cloud uses most of it | Enforza |
| Identity-aware L7 without TLS decryption | SNI and FQDN filtering with no TLS decryption, no key custody | Most deep-inspection threat features need TLS/SSL decryption to work | Enforza |
| Management overhead | One pane of glass; live logs to your own SIEM; no decryption to run | Cert distribution, decryption exclusions and a separate management plane | Enforza |
| Time to deploy / try | Genuine self-serve — start free, deploy on a VM you already run | Demo-gated / field-sales / marketplace motion; even the trial is gated | Enforza |
| Compliance frameworks | 25 framework packs / 210 controls — advise or enforce on publish | Strong certification posture, but no per-publish framework grid in-product | Enforza |
| Classification speed (measured) | Single-pass packet classification and verdict engine — p99 ~49.5 µs, 98.5% in-kernel fast-path | Best-in-class inspection depth; no comparable per-flow figure published | Enforza |
| Management-plane attack surface | Control plane is outbound-only — no inbound management port to expose | A reachable management plane to administer the platform | Enforza |
| Fit for cloud service-to-service traffic | Scoped to cloud egress / east-west — the ~98% a cloud team needs | Carries broad user-centric breadth aimed beyond the cloud network | Enforza |
| Depth of threat prevention | Threat-hardening and egress control; not a full threat-prevention suite | Best-in-class, lab-validated threat prevention and IPS depth | Palo Alto |
| Deep packet inspection breadth | Identity-aware L7 by SNI/FQDN, without decrypting TLS | Full deep-packet inspection with TLS decryption across many protocols | Palo Alto |
| Advanced security services | Focused feature set; no first-party sandboxing or threat-intel cloud | URL filtering, DNS security, sandboxing and a curated threat-intel cloud | Palo Alto |
| Enterprise pedigree & analyst standing | A focused, newer product proven on measured engine numbers | Long-established enterprise platform with deep analyst recognition | Palo Alto |
| The full security platform | A cloud-network firewall — deliberately scoped, not a platform | A broad platform spanning network, endpoint-adjacent and SASE security | Palo Alto |
Where each one fits
Where Enforza wins
- The ~98% a cloud team actually uses. Egress, ingress and east-west control, identity-aware L7 by SNI/FQDN, secure NAT and compliance — the controls a cloud workload firewall needs, with none of the platform breadth you would half-fill.
- Flat, per-firewall pricing. One predictable licence instead of a base hourly plus per-GB traffic plus a per-GB charge for every threat add-on plus a separate management plane — pay for what your cloud uses, not for the whole platform.
- Identity-aware L7 without breaking TLS. SNI and FQDN egress filtering with no TLS decryption and no key custody — so no man-in-the-middle on your own traffic, no broken apps, and none of the cert-distribution and exclusion upkeep that deep inspection demands.
- A smaller attack surface on the firewall itself. Enforza's control plane is outbound-only to the Enforza cloud — no inbound management port and no admin UI to expose, so the security device is not itself a thing to defend.
- Microsecond-class classification, measured. A single-pass packet classification and verdict engine classifies each flow once in microseconds (p99 ~49.5 µs, verified) then enforces in-kernel at line rate (98.5% fast-path) — purpose-built for cloud.
- Self-serve in minutes. Start free, deploy on a Linux VM you already run, drive it from a GitHub pipeline or the console — no demo gate, no marketplace private offer, no procurement project.
When Palo Alto is the right call
- You genuinely need best-in-class, lab-validated threat prevention and IPS depth across many protocols — and you will switch those features on and use them. If that is the requirement, Palo Alto is the right call.
- Your security model requires full deep packet inspection with TLS decryption, and you are set up to own the key custody, exclusions and operational overhead that comes with it.
- You want a broad security platform — network, advanced threat services, SASE-adjacent — consolidated under one enterprise vendor with deep analyst recognition.
- You are an enterprise security organisation buying on threat efficacy and breadth, with the budget and the team to run a platform of that scale.
Palo Alto alternative — common questions
Is Enforza a like-for-like Palo Alto replacement?
No, and we are clear about that. Palo Alto is a genuinely excellent, best-in-class enterprise security platform with deep threat prevention — if you truly need that full breadth, it is the right call and we do not claim to match it. Enforza is a focused cloud-network firewall: egress, ingress and east-west control, identity-aware L7 by SNI/FQDN, secure NAT and compliance — the roughly 98% of capability a cloud workload firewall actually uses, at a flat per-firewall price. It is the right tool for the cloud job, not a smaller version of an enterprise platform.
Where is Palo Alto genuinely better?
In several places, and we say so plainly. Palo Alto has best-in-class, lab-validated threat prevention and IPS depth; full deep packet inspection with TLS decryption across many protocols; advanced services like URL filtering, DNS security and sandboxing backed by a curated threat-intelligence cloud; and the established enterprise pedigree and analyst standing of a broad platform. If you need that breadth and will use it, Palo Alto is the right call.
What does "half used, fully paid for" mean?
An enterprise NGFW platform carries hundreds of capabilities, and it is very common to license the full platform and switch on only a fraction of it for a cloud workload. You still pay for all of it. The fair question is whether those capabilities are things your cloud actually requires, or breadth that is there because it sounds impressive. Enforza is scoped to the controls a cloud team uses, so you are not paying full platform price for a platform you half-fill.
Does Enforza decrypt TLS to filter traffic?
No. Enforza filters egress by SNI and FQDN without decrypting TLS and without holding your keys. Most of a mega-NGFW's deep-inspection threat features require TLS/SSL decryption to work — which means key custody, a man-in-the-middle on your own traffic, the risk of broken apps, and real ongoing management (cert distribution, decryption exclusions, upkeep). Enforza gives you identity-aware L7 control with none of that overhead.
Why does cloud not need most of a mega-NGFW's features?
Cloud traffic is overwhelmingly service-to-service and human-to-service — APIs and applications talking to each other and to your users' apps. It is not end-user-device security. Securing the end user belongs on the user's own device, the endpoint, not on a network firewall sitting in your network. A large part of a mega-NGFW's breadth is user-centric, solving a problem that is not your cloud egress and east-west problem. Enforza focuses on the cloud-network controls that are.
What does Palo Alto Cloud NGFW cost compared to Enforza?
Palo Alto Cloud NGFW is a multi-meter, quote-gated model: a base hourly resource charge (around $1.50/hr, plus per additional Availability Zone), plus a per-GB traffic charge (around $0.065/GB, tiered), plus a separate hourly-and-per-GB charge for every security add-on you enable — and those are the threat features you bought it for — plus a separate management plane. Enforza is a flat per-firewall licence at £179/month (£149 from your sixth), with no per-GB tax and no per-add-on meter. Palo Alto rates are directional, dated 2026-06-14, and subject to change — verify against their estimator for your own numbers.
Does the focused scope mean Enforza is less secure?
No — it means it is right-scoped for the cloud network. Enforza covers the controls a cloud workload firewall needs and adds two real advantages most enterprise boxes do not: identity-aware L7 without decrypting your TLS, and a control plane that is outbound-only, so the firewall has no inbound management port or admin UI to expose. Fewer unused switches is a smaller attack surface, not a weaker posture.
How fast is Enforza's classification?
Each flow is classified once, in microseconds, by a single-pass packet classification and verdict engine — a measured p99 of about 49.5 µs at sustained load — then enforced in-kernel at line rate, with 98.5% of packets taking the kernel fast path. These are our own measured numbers on standard VM sizes; we do not publish a competitor figure to contrast against.
Is there a free way to try Enforza?
Yes. Enforza has a genuine free tier — one firewall with L3/L4 policy and network objects, no card required — and a 14-day trial that unlocks the full feature set, including L7/FQDN filtering, compliance packs, log export and live logs. The paid plan is £179/month per firewall, dropping to £149 from your sixth, plus the Linux VM you already run. Palo Alto's trials are marketplace and sales-gated.
The 98% you actually use — none of the bloat.
Egress, ingress and east-west control, identity-aware L7 without decrypting TLS, secure NAT and compliance — at a flat per-firewall price, on any cloud. Start free, no card.