We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and OPNsense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"Whenever I need something, Fortinet improves and updates the software for me."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the analytics."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"Fortigate represents a really scalable way of delivering perimeter network security, some level of layer 7 security, WAF, and also a way to create a meshed ADVPN solution."
"The dashboard I have found the most valuable in Fortinet FortiGate."
"The wireless control is helpful."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and the UI. It has always provided me with what I needed. I have no need for additional costs that other solutions have, such as Sophos."
"The solution is stable."
"The VPN connection portal scan works flawlessly, which was a big plus for us."
"Previously, anyone in the organization would see any data point in the wall. They could just go and connect their machine with that data point and could access the network. But now, even if someone came and tried that, they will not be given access."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"We use Cisco IOS Security mostly for routers to route off the firewall. It's a next-generation device."
"I've found their network routing to be very good."
"The product has valuable features for business intelligence."
"The initial implementation process is simple."
"It has an open license. It works very well, and there is an update every month."
"OPNsense is highly stable."
"The initial setup is easy. It only takes 15-30 minutes to deploy."
"We have found pretty much all the features of the solution to be valuable."
"We can open a new VPN connection easily. It's much easier than with Fortinet in our experience."
"I feel that its valuable features are that it is simple and free."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"The feedback that I have received is that the performance could be better, and the user experience is not as good compared to a previous solution we used. It could be more user-friendly. Of course, it still works fine for our operations."
"We would like to see a better training platform implemented."
"It should come integrated or have its own type of network monitor tool in a module. There should just be one package, and you are good to go."
"I think the only issue that needs improvement is the interface."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having a frequent ask questions(FAQ) area for people to receive quick answers to popular questions. Additionally, it would be beneficial to have an SMS notification feature. For example, if you cannot access your email you could receive an SMS message."
"I would like upgrading iOS to be a bit easier."
"The configuration should be easier in the solution."
"I think setup could be one area for improvement, because sometimes we don't have people inside so we have to move to the place."
"There could be a bit more functions on offer that could make it easier to use."
"I would love it if it has a link-by-link feature, integration with Unified Threat Management (UTM), and load balancers. They haven't got any link-by-link feature right now, which can be a very attractive option. This link-by-link feature can also be made available for Cisco's UTM firewalls. The link-by-link feature is available in some of the other firewalls. Currently, integration with UTM is missing. Cisco IOS Security also doesn't have the load balancers and a few things that need to be done to get a good UTM firewall. Normally, other firewalls have UTM. As a next-generation firewall, it's good, but as a UTM, it has to do some work."
"The graphical user interface or the GUI could be better. Beginners can use some devices with the GUI, but some security devices are configured using CLI. It would also be better if it had its own Intrusion Protection Service and Intrusion Detection Service on the server."
"I would like to see much more embedded security that works and that isn't a bolt-on."
"Most of their features are meant for Cisco. You cannot integrate them with any other vendor."
"I think the most important thing is that it should be easily accessible, but currently, that doesn't seem to be the case. We need a hardware platform that's based on common standards and open computing principles, which would be like a commodity and benefit us greatly."
"There are some add-ons that need enhancements to make management easier for users, especially the reporting features. Some reports don't show the level of detail I'm looking for, and I've had trouble installing certain add-ons, especially for Internet bandwidth shaping within my company."
"The solution could be more secure."
"An area for improvement in OPNsense is the hardware, which needs to be updated more frequently. DNS blocking is another good feature I want to be added to the solution. pfSense has a peer-blocking feature that I also want to see in OPNsense."
"While they do have paid options that actually gives better features, for most of the clients, if they tend to take a paid option will instead opt for Fortinet."
"OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server."
"You will need additional training before you can actually start to use it."
"In terms of improvement, the performance could be enhanced."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while OPNsense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS, Netgate pfSense and Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, whereas OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. OPNsense 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.
