We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: OPNsense is highly regarded for its ability to adapt and grow, its ability to allow guest access, its user-friendly interface, its versatility, its reliability, its intrusion detection and prevention system, and the availability of a free version. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in their incorporation of machine learning, their ability to prevent attacks in real-time, their unified platform, and their robust security capabilities.
OPNsense has room for improvement in interface simplicity, bandwidth management, high availability, logging, integration, hardware updates, reporting, SSL inspection, and learning curve. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls can enhance customization, SD-WAN configuration, logging accuracy, management interface, documentation, VPN availability, training materials, external dynamic list feature, and internet filtering.
Service and Support: Some users find the customer service for OPNsense excellent, while others believe it could be enhanced. Opinions on Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls' customer service are divided. Some customers appreciate the support team's expertise and promptness, while others have faced challenges in contacting support.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for both OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is described as straightforward. Users with or without IT experience can easily navigate through either setup. The deployment time for both options can vary depending on specific circumstances. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide training materials that contribute to the simplified and user-friendly setup experience.
Pricing: OPNsense primarily incurs expenses for hardware, while the software is available for free. Additional costs may involve public IPs and underlying VMs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are generally perceived as having higher pricing due to licensing and subscriptions. Nevertheless, this higher cost is deemed reasonable given the level of security and features offered by the product.
ROI: OPNsense delivers cost savings within a short period, eradicating the need for ongoing expenses. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls enhance visibility, reporting, and security, streamlining administration and ensuring a sense of security.
Comparison Results: Based on user feedback, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is the preferred choice when compared to OPNsense. Users find the initial setup of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls to be straightforward and easy. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is highly regarded for its embedded machine learning capabilities, strong security features, and comprehensive logging.
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"Its administrative panel is very intuitive and simple. It is simpler than the other solutions that we had. As an administrator, we are always looking for the easiest solution to manage network policies. We are able to filter everything on our network and also use the VPN feature, which is important these days when people are working remotely during COVID."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"The reporting and monitoring are very good."
"The security on offer is very good."
"The most valuable features are simplicity, management, and that it's constantly evolving."
"The simplicity of the configuration and the stability of the product are most valuable. The VPN concentrator is very useful."
"It has very easy management and an amazing ETM configuration."
"We have found pretty much all the features of the solution to be valuable."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"The technical support is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the Dual WAN in OPNSense, which offers advanced capabilities."
"The initial setup is easy. It only takes 15-30 minutes to deploy."
"The most valuable features in OPNsense are reporting and visibility."
"OPNsense is highly stable."
"The system in general is quite flexible."
"The GUI is simple and the solution is straightforward."
"Some of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls' valuable features are their powerful capabilities and user-friendliness."
"I like the navigation of the general Panorama solution. I can easily navigate around and get to the thing I need. I'm not wasting time trying to find something."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide a unified platform that natively integrates all security capabilities."
"The interface is very nice. We generally like the UI the product offers."
"It's very important that Palo Alto NG Firewalls embed machine learning into the core of the firewall to provide inline, real-time attack prevention. That increases our security posture... The firewall is able to capture it and flag it and it is easy to mitigate as soon as we see something like that happening, to secure the environment more, in real time."
"Identifying applications is very easy with this solution."
"A feature introduced by Palo Alto with the version 10-OS is embedded machine learning in the core of the firewall to provide inline, real-time attack prevention. Machine learning analyzes the network traffic and detects if there is any usual traffic coming from outside to inside. Because of Palo Alto, organizations detect around 91% of malicious attacks using machine learning. The machine learning helps customers by implementing firewalls in critical and air gap areas so there is no need to integrate with the cloud sandbox."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"With FortiGate, the main complaint that I have heard is about the technical support."
"If I had any criticism that I would give FortiGate, it would be that they need to stop changing their logging format. Every time we do a firmware upgrade, it is a massive issue on the SIM. Parsers have to be rebuilt. Even the FortiGate guys came in and said that they don't play well in the sandbox."
"The reporting in Fortinet FortiGate could improve. Customers are having to purchase additional reporting components. When I have used the Sophos solution it is a complete solution, in Fortinet FortiGate you have to use additional tools to have the features needed."
"NGN, reporting and controls."
"The platform's interface could improve."
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is the Insight or the NetFlow analysis part. It would be good to have the possibility to dig down on the Insight platform. Right now, we can easily do only a few analyses. If this page becomes more powerful, it surely will be a well-adopted platform."
"There are a few weaknesses. For example, there is a lack of some features that I have in certain commercial products."
"In terms of improvement, the performance could be enhanced."
"The support for OPNsense is good because we have documents available on the internet. The support could improve a little."
"There is room for improvement in SSL inspection."
"OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server."
"The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale."
"You will need additional training before you can actually start to use it."
"They could improve their support and pricing and maybe integration. It's a little more expensive that Check Point but the quality is better. Integration with firewall endpoints could be better. Palo Alto does have very good malware or antivirus protection. I think they could improve on that front."
"Everything has been great. More machine learning would be something great to see, but I don't know if it's a priority for Palo Alto."
"The SD-WAN product is fairly new. They could probably improve that in terms of customizing it and making the configuration a little bit easier."
"I would like them to bring in some features that would encourage traffic shaping or bandwidth routing, like other UTM firewalls, because the solution should be capable of limiting the bandwidth for rules."
"We would like to see improvement in the web interface for this solution, so that it can handle updates without manual intervention to put the data in order."
"The whole performance takes a long time. It takes a long time to configure."
"The built-in machine learning features provide some automation, but I think there should be an option for manual review because nothing replaces the human eye."
"The reports it provides are not helpful."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 163 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and Sophos XGS, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Sophos UTM. See our OPNsense vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
