We performed a comparison between Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] and Netgate pfSense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The solution is extremely reliable."
"It works very well. It has a lot of different functionalities. Its cost is also fine for our customers."
"The security on offer is very good."
"The simplicity of the product is great. It's very easy to use, which is a compliment we get all the time in terms of feedback."
"We've found the solution to be pretty stable."
"This is a quality product with ok support, and it is better than the competition we've tried."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."
"The filtering was very good."
"We can create a domain to separate and segregate some functions, some services."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"The solution is very robust."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"This solution has helped our organization by protecting our network from attacks."
"The main features of this solution are customization and ease to use."
"I handle the scanning for the finance department. I recently encountered an issue with the PCL bills, our company bills. I resolved the matter, cleared the bill, and received calls regarding it using pfsense.The user interface is extremely user-friendly, which is why we use it across various plant sites. Our IT representatives at the plants find it easy to use and manage because of its straightforward interface."
"Easy to deploy and easy to use."
"I had some outages in the network and we provide services for our company. We sell mobile credits. The terminal gets access to our own server inside the network and if one internet fails, then the other one is still up and we have a back-up link on the devices."
"Its features rival many of the high cost solutions out there."
"I'm the expert when it comes to Linux systems, however, with the pfSense, due to the web interface, the rest of the staff can actually make changes to it as required without me worrying about whether they've opened up ports incorrectly or not. The ease of use for non-expert staff is very good."
"Improved service performance and availability through redundancy."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"In the next release, I would like to see the interface simplified to be more user-friendly."
"Fortinet already improved FortiGate, but in the current market, many brands of security devices have improved together. Fortinet still needs to catch up with market standards. Fortinet is lacking in features in comparison to competitors."
"I would suggest that Fortinet add sandboxing to their solution."
"At first glance, the interface for the device is very confusing."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"Its customer service could be better."
"Specifically on the user experience, sometimes the set up of things, such as the VPN SSL, takes a lot of time to load and a lot of time to get up and running on every session."
"Technical support was very bad because the supplier who sold it to us, wasn't very supportive, and he wouldn't giving us direct links to the OEM."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"What has been the issue of firewalls is they ask me for policies and content filtering application control and all these features that are now part of Harmony."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"The interface needs improvement."
"While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade."
"As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve."
"It was difficult to configure our web printer through the solution. This process could be easier. Additionally, integration with SD-WAN solution."
"The access control aspect of the product could be improved."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"It's just not listed as FIPS compliant for where we're at now in government, which is an issue."
"Also, simplifying the rules for the GeoIP. Making it simpler to understand would be an improvement."
"Ultimately, we'd like something stronger, and something that can handle threats better in real-time."
"It would be great to add more to security."
"The main problem with pfSense is that it lacks adequate ransomware protection."
Earn 20 points
Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 19 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] writes "Great firewalls, VPN, and Intrusion prevention capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, KerioControl and Cisco Secure Firewall.
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.