We performed a comparison between Netgate pfSense 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 features are that it is very simple to configure and to manage."
"It is easy to use. We chose this product for the possibility to have virtual domains (VDOMs). We are building another company in the group, and we would like to split the firewalling rules and policies between these two companies. Each company would be able to manage its own policies and security rules, which is an advantage of Fortinet FortiGate. We can define VDOMs, and every company can manage its own VDOM as if it has its own physical firewall, but in fact, we would be using the same physical appliance because we are also using the same internet lines. So, it allows us to reuse the existing resources without the disadvantage of having to compromise on policies and security. Each company can choose its own way of working."
"Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"One of the valuable features is a standardized OS."
"It can expand easily."
"The solution has very good threat and content filtering switches."
"It is useful for protecting and segregating the internal networks from the internet. Most of our customers also use the FortiGate client to connect to their offices by using the VPN client, and of course, they usually activate the antivirus, deep inspection, and intrusion prevention services. They are also using it for web filtering and implementing various policies dealing with forwardings, NAT, etc."
"FortiGate's web and URL filtering are unlike any other firewall I've used. The functionality of URL filtering in those solutions is problematic because everything is encrypted, and firewalls can't break that encryption protocol. Fortinet has an SSL proxy, so the encryption is done before the packet ever leaves the FortiGate. The URL filter is definitely one of the most helpful features."
"It is much simpler than other solutions such as Fortinet."
"It is easy to use and has integrity with other systems, such as proxies and quality of service."
"The features I have found best are ease of use, GUI, and performance."
"The built-in open VPN and the VPN Client Export are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"The ability to create a VPN allows me to monitor branch offices from a central location."
"The classic features such as content inspection, content protection, and the application-level firewall, are the most important."
"Its reliability and cost-effectiveness stand out."
"I had some outages in the network and we provide services for our company. We sell mobile credits. The terminal gets access to our own server inside the network and if one internet fails, then the other one is still up and we have a back-up link on the devices."
"It is stable and pretty much scalable."
"A good tool for file scanning and email threat detection, especially when it comes to attachments and communications."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten since we never faced any issues."
"Scalable ATP solution that's quick to set up. It demonstrates good performance and stability."
"They have many different options with Palo Alto WildFire and the set-up is quick. If you have all the details in hand, it does not take more than 15 minutes to deploy a firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the cloud-based protection against zero-day malware attacks."
"For example, if a security Intel threat talks about an IOC. We can then go to our MSP and say, "Is there a signature for this particular type of malware that just came out?" And if they'll say yes, then we'll say, "Okay. Does it apply to these firewalls? And have we seen any hits on it?" There's absolutely value in it."
"We get support in the free version."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"We would like to see a better training platform implemented."
"It does not have key authentication for admin access."
"The initial setup is complex."
"Tunnel flapping was one of the major things I had seen wherein your internet link remains but your VPN tunnel is down. However, since I got a fix from the TAC team, I have not noticed it, but the customer complained a few times that they couldn't access the internet because of this problem."
"The sniffing packets or packet captures, can be simplified and improved because it's a little confusing."
"One area for improvement is the performance on bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"The integration could be improved."
"The integration should be improved."
"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."
"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."
"The GUI. There are TONS of plugins for pfSense, as such, if a user wants to add quite a bit of functionality, the GUI will feel a little congested."
"Could be simplified for new users."
"Netgate pfSense needs to improve the configuration for a VPN."
"Web interface could be enhanced and more user friendly."
"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."
"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 automation and responsiveness need improvement."
"The cost of this solution could still be improved, in particular, giving product discounts for charitable causes."
"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 price of WildFire should be reduced in order to make it more affordable for our customers."
"In the future, I would like to see more automation in the reporting."
"In the future, Palo Alto could reduce the time it takes to process the file."
Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". 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". Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, KerioControl and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Microsoft Defender for Office 365.
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.