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."Initial setup is easy to configure."
"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 stability of the solution is excellent, as it is with other Fortinet products."
"The payment function for applications is good."
"The security on offer is very good."
"The user interface is relatively easy. The devices are easy to deploy and figure out when you have experience with other security appliances."
"The solution has very good threat and content filtering switches."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It is a good firewall with good performance."
"I like pfSense's security features."
"The gain in performance and security from configuring the VPN connections was significant."
"This solution has increased the level of security, given us more control, provided a deep insight into network traffic, and is a great VPN solution."
"I have found the firewall portion for the blocking most valuable."
"Easy to deploy and easy to use."
"It is much simpler than other solutions such as Fortinet."
"The solution is very easy to use and configure."
"Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides."
"The backup is the best feature."
"Detailed reporting on analysis of content. The inspections are easily applied to security policy profiles and profile groups, and may be assigned on a per-rule basis."
"WildFire's application encryption is useful."
"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 solution is easy to use and the Panorama feature is good. The software management or the malware blocking and some authentication management system are good."
"Scalable ATP solution that's quick to set up. It demonstrates good performance and stability."
"It is the best device in comparison to other network products in the marketplace."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"At first glance, the interface for the device is very confusing."
"The cloud features can be improved."
"Some of the filtering is not robust, you can escape it with a VPN. Some of the users bypass some of the filters. It catches some but it also misses some, that area could be improved. It's functioning reasonably but there's room for improvement in that area."
"Usually, we sell the bundle with the UTM or threat management piece with IPS, IDS. Other providers, such as Palo Alto, are ahead in terms of safe functionality. So, for me, delivering truly safe service is probably something that still needs to be improved."
"There are SD-WAN network monitoring, SD-WAN features, Industrial Databases, Internet of Things, Detection, etc., however, we do have not licenses for those features. We thought that if you bought a product, you should have all of the features it offers. Why should you need to make so many extra purchases to enable features? They should have one price for the entire offering."
"Due to its higher cost, Fortinet FortiGate can lead to increased operational expenses."
"It needs to be more secure."
"Layer 7 advanced firewall features are not included in the solution."
"As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"The Netgate forums and community don’t provide extensive discussions and topics related to every pfSense service."
"The integration should be improved."
"The user interface can be improved to make it easier to add more features. And pfSense could be better integrated with other solutions, like antivirus."
"Lacks instructional videos."
"There are some formats that the solution cannot support ."
"High availability features are lacking."
"They provide a medium level of technical support."
"It would be nice if there was an easier way to install and deploy it, such as through the inclusion of wizards."
"The price could be better."
"The cost of the solution is excessively high."
"The support is good but they could be faster."
"Our main concern is that everything has to be synced with the WildFire Cloud and has to be checked through the subscription."
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.