What advice do you have for others considering OPNsense?

OPNsense is a strong and solid solution that is easy to interact with. I don't see much on the new generation of firewalls, and only a few solutions are available for OPNsense. OPNsense handles network traffic much faster during peak loads because it's on dedicated hardware. I would recommend OPNsense when no specific topic prevents me from recommending OpenSense. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I'm not using OPNsense at the moment. I work with many different technologies and keep testing various setups. Currently, I've gone fully customized. I'm using a Linux server configured as my router and firewall, and I'm using Zenarmor for packet inspection. This setup allowed me to easily configure SSL VPN and port forwarding for specific ports, which isn't as straightforward with other systems. I've tried several, including Untangle, pfSense, and OPNsense, but found them somewhat restrictive. OpenSense is quite good. I like it. It has many services and is somewhat similar to the WatchGuard system. I honestly have no complaints; it was a very good experience. It's easy to set up, especially if you know what you're doing. It also offers a nice library of add-ons. However, if you have appliances with Intel network cards, I would probably go for pfSense instead. Firmware updates and other updates come a bit faster, making it a more reliable service than OPNsense. Everything that comes up on OPNsense appears first on pfSense. Some features are not yet available on OPNsense, and they haven't announced a release date. However, I'm confident they will eventually release these features, as they have previously done. Ultimately, choosing between pfSense and OPNsense is more of a personal preference since they are very similar. Both are FreeBSD systems, operating in similar situations and offering comparable functionality. Now, I'm just using a Linux server. I can monitor the system, reboot the card, install Apache, and redirect web servers within my home directly to the firewall. This eliminates the need for third-party boxes or other connected computers, allowing me to do everything in the same box. It gives me a lot more freedom. That's the main reason I stopped using the other systems. I used OPNsense for about six months, which shows I've tried various solutions to find the best one. Despite all the good things I'm saying about OPNsense, I did stay with it longer than pfSense. I traveled to China, so I used my home as my VPN instead of paying for one. They block VPN services in China, so I was using OpenVPN at home. OpenVPN is a known service, but it gets blocked there. The only way to do it was through SSL VPN, which worked fine. But, talking about OPNsense, everything was working fine. I had no problems. I just had to move away because I needed to use port 443 for something else on my web server, and I can't have a web server together with other stuff. It's a bit more complicated to configure because I use Nginx and Apache, too. You can install these tools on OPNsense, but I found it more complicated than just going onto the command line and doing it. If you want to use something like OPNsense for FreeBSD, use pfSense instead. Unless, obviously, like me, the person in question has some hardware incompatibility with pfSense. Only then would I go for OPNsense. Because, I mean, they're the same systems, but pfSense is a bit better in terms of overall performance, and security updates come quicker and more often. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate OPNsense as a ten out of ten. I would recommend it to others.

If you're new to firewalls, I might recommend using this solution. It's very user-friendly, especially for the first-time users. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

It's easy to configure, and it's good. I rate it a seven out of ten.

It's crucial to have a firewall solution that aligns seamlessly with an open-source approach. Connecting it twice allows for a comprehensive understanding of the network, analyzing factors such as traffic volume, technical specifics, and the nature of inbound and outbound traffic. This step is paramount in selecting the right firewall, considering it provides a holistic view of the network's dynamics. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I just want to say that it's the best open-source firewall. Strongly recommended.

The solution requires no maintenance. I would recommend OPNsense to others. Overall, I rate the solution between seven to eight out of ten.

I would recommend using this solution. I rate OPNsense a nine out of ten.

I would suggest using OPNsense because there's no cost and a good interface. You don't need to use the command line to configure anything like on Cisco; sometimes, you don't need all the technical knowledge to operate OPNSense. Additionally, you have good community support. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We made an attempt, but it appears that forming a partnership would not be done as the other party is requesting a significant amount of money, which we find to be overly expensive. We are exploring the possibility of locating a domestic partner in the United States who has a partnership with either PfSense or OPNsense. Subsequently, if we are successful in finding a suitable domestic partner, they would be able to offer these services to us. While our system is certainly capable of being used, it is important to have the prerequisite knowledge and pragmatic experience to properly configure and troubleshoot it. It is crucial to have a clear understanding of exactly what you are looking to accomplish and to have access to the necessary data in order to effectively configure and use the system. pfSense and other IP firewalls, as well as software-defined firewalls, have been around for a while. However, OPNsense, a French-German-based company, was developed more recently, about five to seven years ago, and has since improved its layout, design, and installable care capability. Additionally, their front end is more informative than others. I would rate OPNsense an eight out of ten.

I'm using two products, OPNsense and pfSense. I upgraded to the latest version of OPNsense. My organization is planning to move OPNsense to the cloud, in particular, hybrid cloud, but right now, it's deployed on-premises. Cloud deployment will be much more efficient than the current on-premises deployment, but I still need to test it before getting approval from the higher-ups. Within my organization, fifty people use OPNsense because one department is trying it out. Still, when the solution is fully deployed, there could be from five thousand to six thousand users of OPNsense. Ten to twelve people help maintain the solution yearly for the whole campus. I advise anyone who wants to implement OPNsense to look into the suppliers and pick the right one because having the right supplier helps you achieve what you want from the solution. My rating for OPNsense is eight out of ten.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. Regarding advice, if they want to use this solution, they have to know how they want to organize the actual networking. When it is well organized, you can easily deploy OPNsense inside it.

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.

I can recommend this product but only to people who are able to use it. It is not for everybody. You need to know how to manage it. I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

I recommend this solution to others because in my country we have a limitation for buying any firewall. I rate OPNsense a nine out of ten.

We use it on-prem, and we can recommend it for a standard, typical IT engineer with a networking background. We have had a good experience with it. It is good in terms of functionality and resource usage. It is easy, and we would recommend it, but for implementing it on the Azure cloud, you need good knowledge of Azure. When it comes to public clouds, you do not have your own hardware, and you need deep knowledge of the public cloud on which you are deploying it. It is a good solution if your installation is not too big. We would recommend it for small customers or companies that are starting in the cloud. I would rate it a seven out of ten.

From my experience, the OPNsense firewall is a good choice for terminating a lot of site2site IPSec connections with a need for various NAT combinations due to network complexity. The NAT possibilities of OPNsense are really flexible and can cover all necessary combinations. The StrongSwan functionality is able to cover almost all possible proposal combinations. 

Sophos UTM/SG has still no possibility of IKEv2 and Sophos XG has a strong limitation in NAT - especially the lack of possibility to configure DNAT greater /24 makes the configuration really awkward. The OPNsense debugging of IPSec connections is quite simple with various levels of detail. For using OPNsense as described above I´d rate it with 9 of 10. 

For home office us,e I would recommend Sophos UTM or XG firewall as home edition because the features described above are not needed there.

I would recomend, sophos UTM Home edition, or sophos xg firewall there is a frees vertion to, cmoaring the free features vrs OPNSense there are a lot of pros. I tried for many years pfsense, opnsense and many other opensource distros, until i started using sophos free vertion, and let me tell you, that was the key for many limitation of the opensource solution.

We do supply the solution and we do use it for ourselves. I'd advise users to get the Geo functionality. It's a nice add-on, which we make use of a lot. It allows which countries are allowed to access your instances, which is very helpful. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I would rate OPNSense five out of 10.

I have been very happy with the solution. I rate OPNsense an eight out of ten.

OPNsense is suitable for Small- to Medium-sized companies. 

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I would rate OPNsense an eight out of ten.

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 suitability of this product often depends on the size of the company, although sometimes there are clients that just want FortiGate and they're not open for negotiation. 

Personally, I like open-source and it's always a bonus if I can get stuff for free. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We plan to continue using this solution. Right now, we are settling our networks. We plan to expand its usage, but I don't think it will happen until 2022. It has a good user interface. Its configuration is simple but requires a little planning. It is much simpler than the Cisco ASA configuration. I would recommend this solution. I would rate OPNsense a nine out of ten. I am happy with it.

We use it as an edge firewall in HA, with license from the developers

I don't have any information on the bandwidth and what it can handle, or how many workstations can work with it. This information is very important, but I can't find any resources for this information. The reporting is amazing. You can export reports, you can set the parameters, and export reports based on your needs. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

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.

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.

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.

We use the private cloud deployment model. I would advise others thinking of implementing the solution to be aware of what you have to do to, and to plan it out beforehand. The solution is not for everybody, but it's not difficult to set up or maintain. I would rate the solution ten out of ten.

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.

I would rate this solution 10 out of 10.

My first advice is to check the recommendations. They have online information to spec it out in general. OPNsense is a great tool for problem-solving with a VPN. It's very nice. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate this product an 8. It still needs to mature. It's new, only two years or three in the market. They are doing great improvements. They still need to fix little things with the high availability and the user interface. That needs to be polished, but they are doing a great job.