We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"The most valuable features are the enterprise modeling and the simple interface."
"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"The reporting you receive out of this appliance is excellent. You will not need an external management system."
"The web tutor and automatic rules by schedule are good features."
"The multi-tenancy feature is most valuable. It integrates very well with FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"It's a user-friendly firewall. Most of the tasks are very simple. It's simple to configure and troubleshoot this firewall."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"The system in general is quite flexible."
"The IDS and IPS features are valuable. From the usability perspective, there is a lot of good documentation. As IT professionals, we found it very easy to configure the firewall. It was easy to configure and use."
"The interface and the dashboard are the most valuable features of this solution."
"It has firewall and VPN capabilities, which are very valuable features."
"It's more secure and more reliable."
"The most valuable features of OPNsense are the GUI and frequent updates."
"It's open source."
"The solution is completely integrated with all the other Palo Alto products. I think that it is the best part for endpoint protection. The firewall features include URL and DNS filtering, threat protection, and antivirus."
"The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall."
"It is stable and pretty much scalable."
"The analysis is very fast."
"Whole team can use the firewall and understand it."
"The scalability is acceptable."
"Scalable ATP solution that's quick to set up. It demonstrates good performance and stability."
"Remote access is excellent."
"I think the only issue that needs improvement is the interface."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"If they could extend their fabric towards other vendor environments for integration, that would be great."
"The inability to scale the FortiAnalyzer to match our growth necessitates the purchase of new hardware."
"The support we receive when we need to upgrade is not satisfactory and has room for improvement."
"There are problems with the custom reporting of the unique traffic. The data is there, but it is too difficult for us to extract."
"The reports are very basic."
"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 solution could be more secure."
"The support for OPNsense is good because we have documents available on the internet. The support could improve a little."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"The interface isn't so friendly user. But we have some technicians here who are quite confident with this tool. OPNSense could maybe add sets of rules so it's simpler to manage different groups with particular needs."
"There is room for improvement in SSL inspection."
"OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server."
"The scalability needs improvement."
"In terms of improvement, the performance could be enhanced."
"It's not really their problem, it's a problem across the board. There will always be problems with interrupted traffic. We have to set it up where we're playing a middle man game where we're stripping it out, looking at it, and then putting it back together and sending it on its way. That requires CPU cycles. And there's some overhead with that."
"The configuration should be made a little bit easier. I understand why it is as it is, but there should be a way to make it easier from the user side."
"The support is good but they could be faster."
"I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product."
"The initial setup was a little bit complex, mainly due to the GUI console and management challenges."
"Many years back an update caused an issue with the firewall. However, Palo Alto not only informed us of said issue, they also sent an update that fixed the issue before I even had time to log in to determine if the issue affected our services."
"The data analytical system for deployment needs to improve."
"The product's false positive logs could be more user-friendly to understand. They could provide examples of precious cases to learn."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Check Point SandBlast Network.
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.