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 product is easy to use and is stable. The SV1 functionality is a benefit."
"It has improved our security capabilities."
"It's very easy to set up, it's very easy to make policies and, for an organization, that means you don't need IT expert in firewalls. You just need to have somebody who knows a little bit of IT, and that's it. With other products, you need someone with a "Masters" degree in firewalls."
"The Fortinet FortiGate local partners were good. I did not have direct contact with Fortinet support."
"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."
"Its administrative panel is very intuitive and simple. It is simpler than the other solutions that we had. As an administrator, we are always looking for the easiest solution to manage network policies. We are able to filter everything on our network and also use the VPN feature, which is important these days when people are working remotely during COVID."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"A strong point of FortiGate is that the graphical interface is complete and easy to use, especially if we think there is a list of operations that we are able to perform inside."
"Is good at blocking IP addresses."
"I like pfSense's reports and how I can control access to the policies on the firewall."
"Open source and support are valuable. I have community support."
"What I like about pfSense is that it works well and runs on an inexpensive appliance."
"The most valuable features of pfSense are the reports, monitoring, filtration, and blocking incoming and outgoing traffic."
"It has a very nice web interface, and it is very simple to use. The way policies are working is also good."
"A free firewall that is a good network security appliance."
"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."
"WildFire's application encryption is useful."
"The most valuable features of this solution are sandbox capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is its ability to adapt to environments and its robustness."
"My primary use case for this solution is for a secure gateway."
"The technical support is good."
"We get support in the free version."
"The graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure."
"A good tool for file scanning and email threat detection, especially when it comes to attachments and communications."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"It can be a little bit more user-friendly in terms of policy definition and implementation. It seems a little bit complicated, and it could be simplified."
"With the reports, you can see it, and you can get good feelings so upper management can go, "Oh, wow. That looks pretty." However, it's very basic."
"I would like to have logs, monitoring, and reporting for a month without extra fees."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"This product could be improved with Active directory integration and better handling in IPsec and GRE Tunnels."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"The GUI could use improvements, though it is manageable."
"I'd like to find something in pfSense that is more specific to URL filtering. We have customers who would like to filter their web traffic. They would like to be able to say to their employees, "You can surf the web, but you cannot get access to Facebook or other social media," or "You can surf the web, but you're not allowed to gamble or watch porn on the web." My technicians say that doing this kind of stuff with pfSense nowadays is not easy. They can implement some filters using IP addresses but not by using the names of the domains and categories. So, we are not able to exclude some categories from the allowed traffic, such as porn, gambling, etc. To do that, we have to use another product and another web filter that uses DNS. I know that there are some third-party products that could work with pfSense, but I'd like the native pfSense solution to do that."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"It could use a little bit of improvement in the reporting."
"They can improve the dynamic of the input of IPs from outside."
"I believe improving integration with various antivirus vendors could be beneficial."
"Ultimately, we'd like something stronger, and something that can handle threats better in real-time."
"There are more specialized solutions that compete with Wildfire. Therefore, they need to work on their machine learning and AI to be more competitive."
"Our main concern is that everything has to be synced with the WildFire Cloud and has to be checked through the subscription."
"The price could be better."
"In the future, I would like to see more automation in the reporting."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"It would be nice if there was an easier way to install and deploy it, such as through the inclusion of wizards."
"The automation and responsiveness need improvement."
"The price of WildFire should be reduced in order to make it more affordable for our customers."
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.