We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall vs. pfSense based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Cisco Secure Firewall and pfSense come out about equal in this comparison. Cisco ASA Firewall has a slight edge when it comes to service and support, but pfSense has an edge when it comes to pricing.
"The ease of setting the solution up is a valuable aspect for us."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"It is simple to manage, and there are a lot of functionalities in the same box."
"Good anti-malware and web filtering features."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"The solution is very easy to understand. It's not overly complex."
"Layer-3 firewall and routing are the most valuable features."
"Security, SD-WAN, and Streetscape are valuable features."
"The GUI is among the most valuable features,"
"Web filtering is a big improvement for us. The previous version we used, the AC520, did not have that feature included. It was not very easy for us, especially because the environment had to be isolated and we needed to get updates from outside, such as Windows patches. That feature has really helped us when we are going outside to pull those patches."
"Cisco has the best documentation. You can easily find multiple documents by searching the web. Even a child can go online and find the required information."
"Netting is one of the best features. We can modify it in different ways. Site-to-site VPN is also an awesome feature of Cisco ASA. The biggest advantage of Cisco products is technical support. They provide the best technical support."
"Collaboration with other Cisco products such as ISE and others is the most valuable feature."
"The VPN is our most widely used feature for Cisco Secure Firewall. Since we were forced into a hybrid working situation by COVID a few years back, VPN is the widely used feature because everybody is working remotely for our agency. So it came in very handy."
"Very good as a stateful inspection firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the access control list (ACL)."
"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."
"It has a good web cache. I used to use a DHCP server and DNS server. For my company, I use pfSense as a load balancing application."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"I like pfSense's reports and how I can control access to the policies on the firewall."
"The most valuable features are the VPN and the capture photo."
"The scalability is very good, where you can do an HA configuration and then bring in another box, if necessary."
"Sophos Intercept X is scalable. Currently, we have almost 30 people using it in our company."
"I am happy with the EPLS, the radius, and I am happy with the captive portal."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"Improvement is needed in the Web Filter quotas to restrict users with allocated quotas."
"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."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"I would suggest that Fortinet add sandboxing to their solution."
"You do need some IT knowledge in order to effectively work with the solution."
"There were quite a few problems with the stability of the system."
"Fortinet currently has many products bundled with FortiGate including the basic firewall and load balancer, and I think that that they need to have separate product portfolios for each of these specialized services."
"Maybe the dashboard could be a bit better."
"Multiple WAN connections: Even though you can implement more than one interface to outside connections, it is lacking on load balances, etc."
"I would like to see them add more next-generation features so that you don't need a lot of appliances to do just one task. It should be a single solution."
"The product crashes. We have a cluster of firewalls and we regularly get failovers."
"Initial setup can be complex. It is complex. We have to set up ASA, SFR module, and FMC separately, which sometimes requires extensive troubleshooting, even for smaller issues."
"The price can be better."
"My team tells me that other solutions such as Fortinet and Palo Alto are easier to implement."
"The solution's deployment is time-consuming, which should be minimized and made more user-friendly for us."
"There could be a way to remote to it through a mobile app. You can always browse through your browser on your mobile phone or tablet, but it would be good to have a dedicated app. I understand that iOS and Android developers are expensive, but there should be a mobile app."
"It would be great to add more to security."
"There are some bias issues and some intrusions in our network that have to be addressed. So, we're thinking of changing this firewall to something like a professional hardware-enabled firewall."
"The GUI could use more “bells and whistles”. It's got plenty of info for a Sysadmin but some people like shiny things."
"The solution’s interface must be improved."
"I expect a better interface with more log analysis because I create my own interface."
"pfSense could improve by having a sandboxing feature that I have seen in SonicWall. However, maybe it is available I am not aware of it."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Meraki MX, Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall, whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, KerioControl and WatchGuard Firebox. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense 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.