Palo Alto Networks

I interviewed with Palo Alto Networks for the first round, which involved an LLD/coding problem. I completed the implementation, clearly explained my approach, constraints, assumptions, and corner cases, and the interviewer acknowledged and agreed with my explanations during the discussion. However, after the round, I was rejected with the feedback that there was a “gap” between the interviewer and me. I found this feedback vague and difficult to understand, especially since the approach and reasoning had been discussed and acknowledged during the interview. If a candidate is not being considered for a role, it would be much more constructive to provide specific, actionable feedback rather than a generic or unclear reason. If there is no genuine intention to consider a candidate, please do not waste their time simply to complete an interview process. I understand that the interviewer’s time is valuable, but the candidate’s time and effort deserve the same respect. And if a candidate is being rejected, providing clear and meaningful feedback would be far more professional and helpful.

I was asked two coding questions based on Data Structures and Algorithms. It was a great learning experience for me as it was my first interview. It had medium difficulty but it was overall a great experience.

online, technical round taken with two panel of members intro with work related questions. scenariio based topology and questionair based on them. intro, what topology i work, what triggers you use to validate any gap.

Three rounds took place, with medium difficulty and one take home assignment then two technical rounds with Hiring Manager. Process was quite long took two months and they kept rescheduling the interviews

Very less openings straight to the points questions were asked needed to have a feedback that could help me out in the future too good professionalism displayed by the team which is what I liked