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."I think that the UTM features are the most value, as it truly protects my infrastructure."
"We have found it to be very reliable and that's why our teams and various users in our company use it as our main firewall every day."
"The security on offer is very good."
"The simplicity of the configuration and the stability of the product are most valuable. The VPN concentrator is very useful."
"Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are that it is very simple to configure and to manage."
"The most valuable feature of FortiGate is FortiView which provides proactive monitoring."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"We can create a domain to separate and segregate some functions, some services."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"It provides visibility and drives organizational security."
"The filtering was very good."
"The solution is very robust."
"I have found pfSense to be stable."
"I have found the firewall portion for the blocking most valuable."
"Content protection, content inspection, and the application level firewall."
"The performance and functionality are good."
"The plugins or add-ons are most valuable. Sometimes, they are free of charge, and sometimes, you have to pay for them, but you can purchase or download very valuable plugins or add-ons to perform internal testing of your network and simulate a denial-of-service attack or whichever attack you want to simulate. You can also remote and monitor your network and see where the gap is. Did you forget a printer port? Most attacks at the moment are happening through printers, and they can tell you immediately that you forgot to close the port of the printer. There are more than one million printers that are in danger, and everybody knows that hackers are using them to enter the network. So, you can download plugins to protect your network."
"The tools' most valuable feature is load balancing."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It is a good firewall with good performance."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"Vulnerability scanning could be improved."
"Usually, we sell the bundle with the UTM or threat management piece with IPS, IDS. Other providers, such as Palo Alto, are ahead in terms of safe functionality. So, for me, delivering truly safe service is probably something that still needs to be improved."
"Lacks training for new features."
"Fortinet should focus on enhancing the capabilities of FortiGate by consolidating its various products, such as FortiGate Cloud, FortiManager, and FortiAnalyzer."
"There can be more security in hybrid implementations. When a customer has a hybrid environment where some parts are in the cloud, we need a consistent security solution for such scenarios."
"I would like to see a more intuitive dashboard."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard and UI, as well as to the reporting."
"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."
"The solution could be improved if there was a better way to report. The reporting functionality is not really good. Even though it's not the major function. Maybe adding a way to make a custom report."
"While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade."
"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."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"The interface needs improvement."
"ClamAV AntiVirus can cause some crashes. That service should be improved."
"As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me."
"The access control aspect of the product could be improved."
"The stability could be improved."
"The GUI could use improvements, though it is manageable."
"pfSense is not user-friendly. I hope to have something to make the interfaces more user-friendly."
"Layer 7 advanced firewall features are not included in the solution."
"The integration of pfSense with EPS and EDS could be better. Also, it should be easier to get reports on how many users are connecting simultaneously and how sections connect in real-time."
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, KerioControl, Sophos UTM 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.