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.
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was significant, since pfSense has replaced a server with a custom Linux open source version, which was running on outdated hardware.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
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: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.
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.
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+
It's easy to access and configure in general. As for features, the firewall and security options were valuable. These are valuable because I like simple things that are easy to work with, as too much difficulty or too much constraint is not good, and boring.
It provided us with better security.
I used it for two months.
There were no issues during the time I used it.
There were no issues during the time I used it.
There were no issues during the time I used it.
It was straightforward because it's simple and easy to understand to begin using.
We used a vendor team who had a good amount of knowledge,
I find PfSense to be just what it claims to be. An enterprise class firewall for the world to enjoy for free! It has all the features and none of the costs. If you understand network engineering concepts, PfSense is your "Swiss-Army-Knife"
Need a firewall? PfSense
Need to do static routing? PfSense
Need to route with RIPv2, RIPng, BGP or OSPF? PfSense
Need VPNs? PfSense Yes that includes GRE tunnels over IPSEC
Need Dynamic DNS Clients? PfSense
Need enhanced object tracking for static routing? PfSense
Need multiple WAN connections load balanced? PfSense
Need traffic shaping? PfSense
Need a proxy server? PfSense
Need IDS? PfSense... install the snort package
I've only listed a few of the things it can do. It's been my home router firewall for 10 years.
I recommend it to SOHO owners and home IT enthusiasts alike whom are on a tight budget. It's got a great interface and it's rock stable. It'll run like a dream on an Intel P3 Processor with 640 Megabytes of RAM installed. It works great on a multitude of used / outdated hardware and offers paid support if you can't do the research/reading yourself. What else could you possibly ask for?
Critical network infrastructure has improved.
I've used it for two years.
I've also used Untangle and Sophos firewalls
Straightforward, but it requires some technical expertise and tweaking.
We implemented it entirely in-house.
Make sure the implementer has programming experience.
Indeed this is a very powerful opensource solution but as you say it requires some technical expertise and tweaking (but actually which firewall technology does not require some now?). Fortunately the community and project documentation are rich and very helpful. Extra packages availability is also rich, it goes from the simple CLI tool like bmon to fully graphically managed RADIUS, SQUID, SNORT servers for instance (see : doc.pfsense.org). It also support natively High Availability Sync thanks to CARP and pfsync protocols (see: doc.pfsense.org). Few days ago I set up VPN SSL configuration with OpenVpn in TAP mode, all done through the GUI (no need to edit any files through CLI) what quite impressed me (usually bridge creation is done through CLI).
To conclude I really invite people looking for a free firewall solution to give a try with pfsense :-)
Just keep in mind such a solution is devoted to projects requiring "not so much speed", I mean 40G or even 100G firewalling and either not UTM inspection.
The primary use case of this solution is to protect our business network.
I like the fact that it is open-source.
The Surakarta and the web blocking functionality seems to be quite good. It's not perfect, but none of them are.
The interface is straightforward and easy to use.
I would like to see the dashboard modernized.
If you look at some of the other providers, their dashboard is more modern looking.
Also, simplifying the rules for the GeoIP. Making it simpler to understand would be an improvement.
I have been using pfSense for approximately one year.
It seems to be relatively stable. I haven't had very many issues.
If I do have any issues, it is more to do with the way that I have configured it. Other than that, it works fine.
It's a scalable solution. We have 14 computers with more powerful hardware that allows us to deal with larger networks.
Apart from what you see on the interface, you can also use the command line to create a cluster if you need to.
The initial setup is straightforward once you read the manual.
I did evaluate another solution but felt that the cost was too high for what it was. Based on the consumer market, I didn't feel that it was at the enterprise level.
I would recommend reading the manual and the administration book. It has all of the proper information.
Many will jump into pfSense without reading the manual properly, or taking the time to understand the definitions, and how to set it up properly.
If you don't, then you might have a bad experience, which would not be fair to the product.
To give a fair comparison and trial, definitely read the technical documentation before implementing it.
Given the fact that it's open-source, relatively easy to use, and it seems to do the job quite well, I would rate pfSense a ten out of ten. I think it deserves that.
Thanks for the information!