We performed a comparison between Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] and Netgate pfSense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The reporting you receive out of this appliance is excellent. You will not need an external management system."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a security device. It can optimize security on the networks of a company. It actually protects the company from attacks from outside. With FortiGate, you can categorize the users. You can create a group of users that can access all of the websites for their work. You can limit other users' access."
"The solution is extremely reliable."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"We use a lot of function on the IPS and it works well for us."
"We have found it to be very reliable and that's why our teams and various users in our company use it as our main firewall every day."
"One of the valuable features is a standardized OS."
"This solution is user-friendly."
"I am happy with the EPLS, the radius, and I am happy with the captive portal."
"An incomparable stability is achieved with other firewall systems."
"The built-in open VPN and the VPN Client Export are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"Its features rival many of the high cost solutions out there."
"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."
"This solution has helped our organization by protecting our network from attacks."
"It is a stable solution. It is also easy to install and can be deployed and maintained by one team member."
"pfSense allows us to spread the hours of connection and do the filtering on the pfSense site."
"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."
"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."
"Lacks training for new features."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"One of the features that I would like to have is to do with endpoint production, it should be integrated. For example, the firewall gets notified of any kind of forensic event that needs to be done, such as if there is a ransomware attack and how it originated, all those records have to be available from the firewall, which is not."
"I haven't had a single issue since using Fortinet."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"Application management can be improved."
"I haven't seen any feature that will allow me direct authentication for a VPN solution."
"Also, the GUI is helpful, but it's not user-friendly. It's complicated. It should be more intuitive for the average user and have an excellent graphical view. Of course, the user will typically know about network administration, but it still should be easy to understand."
"Reporting and real-time monitoring, since I'm used to Watchguard's reporting features, it would be nice to have an embedded solution for reporting."
"I've never tried it in large environments. All my clients are small businesses with a handful of employees, so I am not sure how it works in large environments. I keep up with recent versions, and there's nothing I'm waiting for, and nothing breaks when I get a new version."
"Other solutions provide more scope for growth. For instance, we can have only 10 to 20 employees on VPN, but other solutions can support more users. We also have more capabilities to increase the performance of the solution."
"The integration of pfSense with EPS and EDS could be better. Also, it should be easier to get reports on how many users are connecting simultaneously and how sections connect in real-time."
"It is not centrally managed, where you log into the website and can see all your services there. We would like to be able to see is all the configurations from a central interface on all our pfSenses."
"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."
"It requires more attention to provide a better alternative for open source to small government or educational institutions with reduced budgets in terms of technology."
Earn 20 points
Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 15 reviews. Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "Feature-rich, well documented, and there is good support available online". Comodo Dome Firewall [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, Cisco Secure Firewall and KerioControl.
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.