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 technical support in our region is excellent."
"The reporting and monitoring are very good."
"Using this product makes the VPN seamless and almost invisible to me in the sense that I don't have to think about it."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"SSL-VPN is very useful for us and has been very reliable."
"The tool is a nice product and easy to handle. The software's user interface is also good. You can easily implement remote access in the solution."
"This version is stable. I don't have any issues with this solution, in our environment, it works well."
"The user interface (UI) is very, very good."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"It provides visibility and drives organizational security."
"The solution is very robust."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"The most valuable feature for us was to implement negligent functionality, to direct functionality to viewer control and application control so we could disconnect, and at the same time, we installed checkpoints. We disconnected our proxy."
"Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."
"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."
"Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security."
"I can manage it easily by myself."
"An incomparable stability is achieved with other firewall systems."
"The GUI is easy to understand."
"The ability to create a VPN allows me to monitor branch offices from a central location."
"I like pfSense's reports and how I can control access to the policies on the firewall."
"Open source and support are valuable. I have community support."
"The solution has good customization abilities and plenty of features."
"Its customer service could be better."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"The support team for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be more customer friendly."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve the user interface. There should be more functionality and options through the GUI."
"The user interface could be improved to make it less confusing and easier to set up."
"The feature which gives us a lot of pain is ASIC architecture."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 interface needs improvement."
"The solution could use better reporting. They need to offer more of it in general. Right now, the graphics aren't the best. If you need to provide a report to a manager, for example, it doesn't look great. They need to make it easier to understand and give users the ability to customize them."
"My only observation is about the quality of the IPSec logs, which are difficult to interpret and are poor in filters."
"The main problem with pfSense is that it lacks adequate ransomware protection."
"Ultimately, we'd like something stronger, and something that can handle threats better in real-time."
"It needs to be more secure."
"The integration should be improved."
"They can improve the dynamic of the input of IPs from outside."
"If a user doesn't have a large amount of experience in Linux systems, they will have problems using this solution. Users need to be highly skilled in troubleshooting competency. Users who do not have such skills will find the product difficult to use."
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.