Netgate pfSense Reviews

We use pfSense as a firewall in the healthcare sector, education sector, and banking sector.

pfSense is very easy to use.

It is a better firewall than others and it has better features.

They do not provide support in India.

The security could be improved.

I have been selling pfSense for 12 years.

pfSense is a very stable solution.

We have 50 customers who use this solution.

We provide local support to our customers.

It is very easy to install.

We only need one person to install and maintain this solution.

When compared with other firewalls, the price is reasonable.

There is an open-source community version that is available.

I would rate pfSense a nine out of ten.

For security testing in network functions virtualization (NFV). 

It is a good firewall with good performance.

Stateful packet inspection. It works quite well for an open source product. 

More regular patch updates, because this is very important for a firewall.

Works with:

• Routers
• Firewalls
• Network address translation (NAT)
• VPN
• OpenVPN
• DHCP Server.

• More control of the access to network resources
• More control of the security policies
• Integration with Active Directory
• Centralized administration

Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security.

Services on additional features: 

• SNMP Network Management 
• Managing inventory
• Generating IT reports.

I use pfSense firewall, especially as an IPSec VPN Server. There are several VPN connections with equipment of various manufacturers at the other end.

I use ServerU as hardware instead of an ordinary PC, as most other people usually do.

The gain in performance and security from configuring the VPN connections was significant, since pfSense has replaced a server with a custom Linux open source version, which was running on outdated hardware.

Security and stability. The pfSense server acts as "IPSec VPN Server" for a small financial institution, but regardless of the company size, interruptions would cause significant financial impact.

pfSense serves us very well. My only observation is about the quality of the IPSec logs, which are difficult to interpret and are poor in filters. I have more than 10 IPSec VPN connections, and when there is a need for troubleshooting, the logs are of little help.

With regard to this configuration, I consider it a stable solution.

Firewall system for small, medium, and large data networks. It allows you to provide security to your environment: DMZ networks, LAN, WAN, etc. A very stable product that lasts over time, easy to understand, and administer.

With pfSense, an incomparable stability is achieved with other firewall systems. It is easy to use and has integrity with other systems, such as proxies and quality of service.

Security

• Stability
• Integration with other systems
• Easy assimilation of its features
• Easy administration
• Multiple network management tools
• Load balancing
• Multiple links
• High availability, etc.

The connections should be shown in a more specific way, as Kerio Control does. It should integrate with LDAP, Active Directory, etc, to improve the way in which the traces and connections of each IP, or user connected through the firewall, are shown.

Outbound Load Balance for internet links work great. It's very good to keep internet access for the company we support.

I could keep my customers working even if they lose one internet link. Most of them have at least two links.

We have been using this for 10 years.

There was a problem when I ran a version update, then the server just stopped working. This was because pfSense (in this case FreeBSD) was no longer supporting the hardware of the server (HPE).

There were no stability issues. If there are issues, they usually stem from a hardware fault.

There were no scalability issues.

It is usually easy to find answers in the forum.

Technical support is good.

I used Kerio and Microsoft. I switched because I was looking for something with better security and for someone who could fix bugs faster.

The setup was easy. You can install it in two minutes. It takes more than five minutes to put it to work with a single internet link plus NAT.

It is free.

VPN has allowed me to deploy applications just for the organization and not to public servers.

The ability to create a VPN allows me to monitor branch offices from a central location.

A way to clean squid cache from the GUI.

Not at all.

• Snort
• CARP
• Load balancing
• VPN

• Reduced the cost of our firewall solution
• Enhanced throughput compared with similar priced devices
• Stability
• Reliability

I'm no expert on this subject, and the OS performs all that is required.

I've used it for over one year.

No issues encountered.

We've only had to do one reboot in six months.

None as yet, because the solution hasn't reached capacity yet.

I'm yet to use the official tech support as the community provides all that I have required.

• Sonicwall
• Cisco ASA

We switched due to licensing costs and scalability.

It's relatively simple and straightforward, with enough documentation avalable online for the average user to install and setup.

£2000+