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 SD-WAN feature is the most valuable. This feature evolved from link load balancing. It has helped us in terms of our uptime and privatizing applications whenever we experience an outage. The SD-WAN feature has been a plus for us. Two-factor authentication has allowed us to add more users in terms of remote working. We have two-factor authentication for remote workers to authenticate them before they get on the network."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"Initial setup is straightforward. There weren't too many issues with setting it up. It takes one hour or so."
"Fortinet FortiGate is user-friendly and affordable."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"Overall, the pricing of the solution is very good. The product offers good value."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"It provides visibility and drives organizational security."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"The filtering was very good."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"We can create a domain to separate and segregate some functions, some services."
"The solution is very robust."
"Its reliability and cost-effectiveness stand out."
"Great extensibility of the platform."
"What I like about pfSense is that it works well and runs on an inexpensive appliance."
"The intrusion detection feature is the most valuable. It is an open-source firewall, so there is a lot of material on it. I also find the open VPN capability very nice. It is pretty customizable. The clustering and the high availability are the two biggest things to be able to get out of a firewall."
"Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security."
"The solution is very easy to use and has a very nice GUI."
"I like pfSense's reports and how I can control access to the policies on the firewall."
"The tools' most valuable feature is load balancing."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"I would like some automated custom reporting."
"Some of the web policy reports could be improved."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"Currently, FortiGate is providing SSL VPN. But they're missing some features that are available in Palo Alto's SSL VPN."
"Fortinet FortiGate is not very easy to use. The navigation could be improved to make it easier to use."
"Sometimes you do need to know some CLI commands, so it's a bit harder for technicians or new people that don't know it."
"The interface needs improvement."
"While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"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 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."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"It's just not listed as FIPS compliant for where we're at now in government, which is an issue."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"I would like to see different graphs available in the reporting."
"I've never tried it in large environments. All my clients are small businesses with a handful of employees, so I am not sure how it works in large environments. I keep up with recent versions, and there's nothing I'm waiting for, and nothing breaks when I get a new version."
"The technical support needs to be improved."
"Adjustment in the interfaces: I had to adjust those interfaces manually and of course that is a great feature that you can restore it but it is immediately also one point for improvement. If you don't have to adjust, if it's just stamped and it works, that's great."
"pfSense has some limitations in detecting site sessions. We want to control internet usage based on sites and their content, and pfSense doesn't perform this function."
"Also, the GUI is helpful, but it's not user-friendly. It's complicated. It should be more intuitive for the average user and have an excellent graphical view. Of course, the user will typically know about network administration, but it still should be easy to understand."
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.