OPNsense Reviews

The system in general is quite flexible.

The interface isn't so friendly user. But we have some technicians here who are quite confident with this tool. OPNSense could maybe add sets of rules so it's simpler to manage different groups with particular needs.

We've used OPNSense over the last six months.

The support service isn't very accessible, so you have to look at the forums to solve some issues. It would be better if they could offer this product with an associated support service.

It's quite easy to install and configure the rules.

The main cost is the hardware. We don't pay anything for the software.

I would rate OPNSense five out of 10.

I am using OPNsense as a security platform at work but am currently working from home and using it for network access.

I have found the solution has some great features overall, such as guest access capabilities, dashboards, and ease of use. There is plenty of documentation and support and it has the plugins that I needed.

The logging could improve in OPNsense.

I have been using OPNsense for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

OPNsense is scalable.

I have contacted the support for the Open Source plugin and the company has been really supportive. Within approximately an hour or two I was receiving a response, I was really impressed with the support.

There is fantastic community support available online.

The installation was straightforward.

I have been very happy with the solution.

I rate OPNsense an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for an SD-WAN firewall.

We have found pretty much all the features of the solution to be valuable.

The solution could be more secure. 

I have been using OPNsense for upwards of ten years. 

The solution is very stable.

The solution is scalable. 

As we have in excess of 2,000 solutions deployed in the field, there is no need for us to increase its usage. It is already sufficiently increased. 

In the past we used pfSense. We have also used Sophos and Palo Alto Firewall but have replaced many of these solutions.

Our initial setup was more on the straightforward side.

It did not take a long time, although this can hinge on what needs to be accomplished. 

We handled the deployment on our own. 

The technical team required for deployment and maintenance purposes is small, probably around five people for every 100 devices.

It consist of a combination of managers, administrators and engineers.

The choice of a license on a yearly or monthly basis is optional. 

The solution is not expensive. 

There are several hundred users in our organization who are utilizing the solution. 

I would absolutely recommend the solution to others who are contemplating its implementation.

I rate OPNsense as a ten out of ten. 

The solution is primarily used as a basic firewall. I'm running my WiFi through it.

The solution is very user-friendly.

It's easy to manage and deploy.

The solution is good for a basic firewall for a small business or for home use.

The solution can't compete with next-generation firewalls.

The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale.

I've been using the solution for a year or two.

There are issues with the VPN availability, but overall, the is a pretty smooth connection.

We have two people running the solution and another 50 to 80 people using the solution, so we have a relatively small setup.

The solution is scalable and can be deployed to multiple VMs.

I've never reached out to technical support. If I run into problems, I tend to Google queries in order to find solutions.

I was not at the company when they had a different solution, so I am unsure as to what it was.

Currently, I'm looking for another firewall and I am working on upgrading. We may use an Ignition firewall in the near future.

I've also deployed a couple of different firewalls in the past, including Huawei.

The solution wasn't too complex, but the VPN setup isn't so reliable. It sometimes misbehaves or malfunctions or breaks down automatically. Occasionally it disconnects and you can't transfer the data from it.

Deployment took about a day or so. It takes maybe five or six hours to get everything up and running.

Since it's a simple firewall, anyone who has basic firewall knowledge can run and maintain it.

I had some help internally from our network team when I was implementing the solution. However, I did not need outside assistance from a consultant or integrator.

We are using a free version of the solution.

I'm just a customer. I'm not a partner or reseller.

I'm not sure which version of the solution our organization is currently using. I understand that it is the most up-to-date version. I updated it two months ago.

The solution is good for a small business or home. I'm not sure what the paid version offers or if it has more security features that would be suitable for larger businesses. The version I'm using works well and is simple. It's more reliable than a router.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for VPN connections. We are currently supporting an SAP company, which has many customers, and most customers need a site-to-site active set connection for maintaining the SAP systems. We currently have round about 200 VPNs.

The feature I find most valuable is that the program helped me to realize all the requested functionality that was needed:

- IPsec VPN connections to remote gateways from various Vendors

- IPsec VPN connections with SNAT (our local network in use at remote site)

- IPsec connections with DNAT (remote network in use at our local site)

- Let's Encrypt certificate for WebGUI

- SSH Access by Putty to the device

Something that needs to improve is the translation. This comes into play when you have a remote and a local site and you have to work with two different transfer networks for each direction. What I'm missing is user portal for downloading the configurations for SSL VPN clients. It's still not implemented so it seems that this product is still in a developing process. 

Sometimes it's a little difficult to find some examples for special scenarios. But we have to keep trying and I believe it is possible. It's quite a suitable possibility to use it for VPN connections.

The monitoring is a little complicated and I have tried to use a plug-in, but it's quite complicated to configure. I had to write my own script.

With the VPN solutions, it is possible  to cover up all the scenarios which we have. For instance, if you have a customer and your local network is already in use, you have to work with source nat. It is possible and it works. Another issue that customers sometimes have Networks, which are already in use on out local site. It means you have to work with a destination nat but it is possible to create. 

I would, therefore, like to see the monitoring of the firewall being easier to configure, or to have more templates for this so that you can download the configurations for each scenario and get more detailed descriptions like how all the available plug-ins are performing.

I am currently running it on Hyper-V and so far I have had no problems. It is currently stable enough.

We have 250 people in our company using this program who are able to run the SAP systems with side-to-side connections between the company and the customers. We have six people for deployment and maintenance. I am responsible for the networking. 

There is no technical team in the Netherlands, but so far I fixed my own issues by reading up on the internet.

We are using several VPN gateways. We are using our primary solutions in our company, making all the IT for the complete caller group. The caller group has around about 1,600 people in 10 companies. They are part of this group. We have one, main office and several branch offices.

We are using Juniper SSG Firewalls for Site2Site IPsec connections to customers and this Equipment is working really good. Unfortunately this devices will be running out og supprot soon, so we have to look for some alternatives.

The central equipment we use is Sophos UTM/SG and Sophos XG configured as high availability. The branch offices are connected by Sophos RED and we mainly use Sophos RED 50 with the AP 55 access points configured as WPA2 Enterprise. For central management, everything is managed in the main office. We are using SMTP proxy with anti-span and anti-virus on SG solutions. This is the only one that doesn't work because we have a problem in that our exchange users are too many, and there are too many accounts - this fact caused the Appache runnig out of ressources.

An example would be if you have one workstation with two smartphones, and each person has maybe three or four sessions opened on the exchange. If you have 1,400 accounts, you can reach 8,000 sessions. If the Appache message scoreboard is full is comming up, no further users can connect. We have contacted Sophos support to solve this but they were not able to do this - the only effect was a correction of the sizing guide from Sophos. 

The setup was straightforward and the only mistake you can make is not to log in at the installer during the setup. I made this mistake once and configured a lot of features. After doing this I could not save the configurations on a disc. Generally, it was quite easy to install and to configure. 

The initial deployment took about two hours but figuring out how it works in detail and to run a roundabout took two or three days. 

There are no licensing costs for OPNsense.

We had to evaluate other solutions because our primary solution was Juniper SRX, but we were not happy with the features. So we had no other choice and we were forced to look for something else. We use the Sophos XG firewall because we can configure it directly from Azure. 

We found the OPNsense solution interesting because there are no costs. In Azure, you only pay for the virtual machine. 

My advice would be to compare all the solutions because they all offer something different. Find out what's available and get a feeling for the product and look at the configurations on the firewall. 

In the next version, I would like a friendlier user interface where the users can look at and download the configurations for the OPNsense clients.

My rating for this solution is a seven out of ten.

The most valuable feature of OPNsense is compatibility.

OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based.

The timeline for new features could be better. They could be faster at updating features.

I have been using OPNsense for approximately 10 months.

OPNsense is stable.

We have a maximum of approximately 80 users using this solution on a daily basis.

I have not used the support from OPNsense.

I was previously using pfSense but I switched to OPNsense because it was a newer kernel, which would have worked better with our upgraded hardware.

I have used ClearOS for a long time prior to pfSense.

The initial setup of OPNsense is very easy.

I rate the initial setup of OPNsense a four out of five.

The price of OPNsense is good.

I rate the price of OPNsense a five out of five.

I advise others before they start to see the documentation of the solution first. The documentation was very useful.

I rate OPNsense an eight out of ten.

I rated the solution an eight because there's always room for improvement. It's not a perfect solution.

The interface and the dashboard are the most valuable features of this solution. 

There should be more technical documentation. 

I have been using it for the last year and a half. 

It is stable. 

We have two customers who use this solution and ten people on my team. My clients are enterprise-size. 

I am satisfied with the technical support. 

The initial setup is very easy. It took around one hour. It's only getting the licensing and getting started. 

It doesn't need a POC, doing a demo is enough. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten. The documentation about the malware and APT needs improvement to know more about the vulnerabilities. The product information is fine. 

We have primarily been using it for testing at our company, but the normal primary use for the product is as a firewall.  

The most valuable thing about this product is that it is very easy to use. The graphic user interface is very good and it is user-friendly.  

The feature that I would like to see in the next release, I think, would be to improve the VPN (Virtual Private Network) selection. Specifically, I would like to improve the section where you can set the VPN IP address to high availability.  

We have been using OPNsense [Stands for: "Open (source) makes sense."] for about one year.  

The stability of OPNsense is actually very good.  

The scalability of OPNsense is also very good.  

Our experience with technical support has been good. We have a few issues, and if we do we have been satisfied with the support.  

The initial set up was pretty easy. The total time for deployment took just one or two days.  

OPNsense is open source software so at this time it is free for us to use.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate OPNsense between and eight or nine-out-of-ten. If I have to choose I would pick nine because it is practically a perfect solution for us.  

I definitely recommend the product to other people who are considering using this as a solution to use it because it is a good solution.