Compare Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense
Sponsored
 | Rifat Hyseni Director of Information Technology at a government |
 | Gertis Des Vignes ICT Product Manager at a comms service provider |
 | YaserAljohani OT/ICS Information Security Specialist at SANS |
Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
521,189 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"I like the way Firepower presents the data. It gives you two classifications for the evidence, something based on the priority of the evidence and another classification based on the impact of the evidence in your environment. This makes it very easy to spot the evidence that is most impactful to my environment. Instead of having to go through all the evidence based on that priority, I can focus on the evidence that has the most impact on my environment."
"The most valuable feature of the Firepower solution is FireSIGHT, which can be easily managed and is user-friendly."
"Once you add Firepower onto to it and you start enabling some of its features, you get some IDS/IPS involved with it and you can even do web filtering."
"The most valuable features of Cisco firewalls are the IPS and IDS items. We find them very helpful. Those are the biggest things because we have some odd, custom-made products in our environment. What we've found through their IPS and IDS is that their vulnerability engines have caught things that are near-Zero-day items, inside of our network."
"The IPS, as well as the malware features, are the two things that we use the most and they're very valuable."
"The protection and security features, like URL filtering, the inspection, and the IPS feature, are also very valuable for us. We don't have IT staff at most of the sites so for us it's important to have a robust firewall at those sites"
"We can easily track unauthorized users and see where traffic is going."
"With the FMC and the FirePOWERs, the ability to quickly replace a piece of hardware without having to have a network outage is useful. Also, the ability to replace a piece of equipment and deploy the config that the previous piece of equipment had is pretty useful."
"It helped us with its routing capabilities which eased the cost, because otherwise I would have had to take a router and firewall, and then integrate it. With this, however, it was an integration of firewall and routing services all together in a single product. That was one thing that I loved about it."
"The EEE security controls allow us to make policy restrictions, so I can customize port numbers to allow or limit control."
"Performance is a strong point."
"Juniper is one of the most powerful network security solutions while remaining simple to use, set up, and scale."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"Technical support is perfect."
"The solution has been good for fulfilling our basic needs."
"Troubleshooting with the solution is quite easy. If you compare the process to, for example, Fortigate, Juniper is much easier."
"The feature I find most valuable, is that the program helped me to realize all the requested functionality that was needed."
"The initial setup is easy. It only takes 15-30 minutes to deploy."
"The graphic user interface is very good and it is user-friendly which makes the product easy-to-use."
"The solution is good for a basic firewall for a small business or for home use."
"The interface and the dashboard are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable features in OPNsense are reporting and visibility."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
Cons
"Also, they have a Firepower source file that I can work on the ASA device and on Firepower devices. A problem here lies in the way that you manage these devices. Some devices do not support the FMC, and some devices have to be managed through ASDM, and others have to be managed through FMC."
"I would like to see the inclusion of more advanced antivirus features in the next release of this solution."
"In Firepower, there is an ability to search and dig into a search, which is nice. However, I'm not a super fan of the way it scrolls. If you want to look at something live, it's a lot different. You're almost waiting. With the ASDM, where it just flows, you can really see it. The second someone clicks something or does something, you'll see it. The refresh rate on the events in Firepower is not as smooth."
"The worst part of the entire solution, and this is kind of trivial at times, is that management of the solution is difficult. You manage FireSIGHT through an internet browser. I've had Cisco tell me to manage it through Firefox because that's how they develop it. The problem is, depending on the page you're on, they don't function in the same way. The pages can be very buggy, or you can't resize columns in this one, or you can't do certain things in that one. It causes a headache in managing it."
"For the new line of FTDs, the performance could be improved. We sometimes have issues with the 41 series, depending what we activate. If we activate too many intrusion policies, it affects the CPU."
"The user interface for the Firepower management console is a little bit different from traditional Cisco management tools. If you look at products we already use, like Cisco Prime or other products that are cloud-based, they have a more modern user interface for managing the products. For Firepower, the user interface is not very user-friendly. It's a little bit confusing sometimes."
"We would like to see improvement in recovery. If there is an issue that forces us to do recovery, we have to restart or reboot. In addition, sometimes we have downtime during the maintenance windows. If Cisco could enhance this, so that upgrades would not necessarily require downtime, that would be helpful."
"We had an event recently where we had inbound traffic for SIP and we experienced an attack against our SIP endpoint, such that they were able to successfully make calls out... Both CTR, which is gathering data from multiple solutions that the vendor provides, as well as the FMC events connection, did not show any of those connections because there was not a NAT inbound which said either allow it or deny it."
"IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated."
"It should be easier to escalate support tickets."
"There are a lot of features that customers do not know about and I think that better documentation would help when it comes to learning how to use the product."
"It could have features that other products support like blade options and stand-alone endpoint security."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
"The user interface and the GUI need improvement."
"The solution isn't very granular or detailed."
"While the GUI is pretty good on the Juniper side, there can still be tweaks made to it that will make it even better."
"The ability to set the VPN IP address would be a welcome addition."
"The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale."
"There should be more technical documentation."
"There are issues with stability and reliability."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is the Insight or the NetFlow analysis part. It would be good to have the possibility to dig down on the Insight platform. Right now, we can easily do only a few analyses. If this page becomes more powerful, it surely will be a well-adopted platform."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"The solution could be more secure."
"The price of this solution is not good or bad."
"The Firepower series of appliances is not cheap. I just got a quote recently for six firewalls that was in the range of over half-a-million dollars. That's what could push us to look to other vendors..."
"Our subscription costs, just for the firewalls, is between $400,000 and $500,000 a year."
"Cisco's pricing is high, at times, for what they provide."
"The one-time cost is affordable, but the maintenance cost and the Smart Net costs need to be reduced. They're too high."
"We normally license on a yearly basis. The hardware procurement cost should be considered. If you're virtual maybe that cost is eradicated and just the licensing cost is applied. If you have hardware the cost must be covered by you. All the shipping charges will be paid by you also. I don't thing there are any other hidden charges though."
"Cisco pricing is premium. However, they gave us a 50 to 60 percent discount."
"There are additional implementation and validation costs."
More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »
"There was no additional licensing cost because there were no IPS services. It was just a firewall IP circuit router so they have the default licensing. We just need to renew the support yearly."
"Compared to other vendors, the pricing of this solution is good."
"The product itself is costly and the price of migration is very high."
"This is an expensive product."
"The price is reasonable."
"The price could improve, it is a bit expensive."
"Its price is reasonable. In India, most of the products have a similar price. There is only a 5% to 10% variation in the price of different brands."
"There is a licensing fee."
"There are no licensing costs for OPNsence."
"OPNsense is open source software so at this time it is free for us to use."
"OPNsense is a well known open-source tool."
"It is not an expensive product. Basically, I deployed it because it was the fastest solution to satisfy our needs in open source."
"OPNsense is an open-source solution and it is free to use."
"The solution is not expensive."
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
521,189 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Answer: Cisco Firepower is good
Top Answer: Ease of Use
- GUI familiarities and adoption level can differ from user to user.
- Personally I found CISCO ASA… more »
Top Answer: Cisco Firepower Family and it is a NGFW since ASA is just a FW.
Top Answer: I like that Juniper SRX is easy to use, scalable, and stable with good performance.
Top Answer: In general, their price definitely couldn't be cheaper.
Top Answer: In the next release, I would like to have a better web interface. It needs to be more user-friendly. Right now, you can… more »
Top Answer: We have found pretty much all the features of the solution to be valuable.
Top Answer: The choice of a license on a yearly or monthly basis is optional. The solution is not expensive.
Top Answer: The solution could be more secure.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 58% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Cisco Firepower NGFW, Cisco Firepower Next-Generation Firewall, FirePOWER, Cisco NGFWv
SRX
Cisco NGFW firewalls deliver advanced threat defense capabilities to meet diverse needs, from
small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide
range of models, Cisco NGFW can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Advanced threat
defense capabilities include Next-generation IPS (NGIPS), Security Intelligence (SI), Advanced
Malware Protection (AMP), URL filtering, Application Visibility and Control (AVC), and flexible VPN
features. Inspect encrypted traffic and enjoy automated risk ranking and impact flags to reduce event
volume so you can quickly prioritize threats. Cisco NGFW firewalls are also available with clustering
for increased performance, high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco Firepower NGFWv is the virtualized version of Cisco's Firepower NGFW firewall. Widely
deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco NGFWv automatically scales up/down to meet
the needs of dynamic cloud environments and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco NGFWv
can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your
environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is
delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco
SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables
greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.
High-performance security with advanced, integrated threat intelligence, delivered on the industry's most scalable and resilient platform. SRX Series gateways set new benchmarks with 100GbE interfaces and feature Express Path technology, which enables up to 1 Tbps performance for the data center.
OPNsense is an open source, easy-to-use and easy-to-build FreeBSD based firewall and routing platform. OPNsense includes most of the features available in expensive commercial firewalls, and more in many cases. It brings the rich feature set of commercial offerings with the benefits of open and verifiable sources.
Learn more about Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall
Learn more about Juniper SRX
Learn more about OPNsense
Rackspace, The French Laundry, Downer Group, Lewisville School District, Shawnee Mission School District, Lower Austria Firefighters Administration, Oxford Hospital, SugarCreek, Westfield
7-Eleven, AARNet Pty Ltd, Allegro Networks, alltours GmbH, Apollo Hotel Papendrecht, Armstrong Atlantic State University, Atlantech Online, Availity, Bajaj Capital, Baloise Insurance, BancABC, BAS Group, Black Lotus, Blue Box, Borealis, Carilion Clinic, Catholic Health System, CATV, Champlain College, Chinas Ministry of Railways, China University of Mining and Technology (CUMT), Cloud Dynamics, CloudSeeds, Cloudwatt, CODONiS, Colt Technology Services, Cork Internet Exchange, CSS Versicherung AG, CyrusOne, Danish Crown, Deloitte Belgium, Department of Energy, Divona Telecom, DQE Communications, DreamHost, European Government Agency, Expedient, Financial Market Information Services Provider, Fluidata, Fonality, Fox Sports, Global Financial Institution, Global Investment Bank, Global Investment Company, Energy Sciences Network (ESnet), Goethe University, HEAnet, High Performance Networks Inc., Hillenbrand
CompuNet Systems GmbH,
Comms Service Provider21%
Financial Services Firm18%
Manufacturing Company9%
Non Profit9%
Comms Service Provider36%
Computer Software Company20%
Government6%
Manufacturing Company4%
Comms Service Provider45%
Financial Services Firm17%
Energy/Utilities Company7%
Retailer3%
Comms Service Provider37%
Computer Software Company23%
Government5%
Media Company4%
Comms Service Provider47%
Computer Software Company15%
Government5%
Media Company5%
Small Business40%
Midsize Enterprise28%
Large Enterprise32%
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise75%
Small Business40%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise36%
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise47%
Small Business70%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise20%
Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
521,189 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Juniper SRX is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 25 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 9 reviews. Juniper SRX is rated 7.6, while OPNsense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX writes "This best in class Next-Gen firewall is elegant in its ease-of-use and architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Has good performance but I want to see a friendlier user interface". Juniper SRX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, pfSense and Azure Firewall, whereas OPNsense is most compared with pfSense, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM, Sophos XG and Fortinet FortiGate. See our Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense report.
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.