Compare OPNsense vs. Sophos UTM
Sponsored | ||
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | ||
"This solution has good security, and it's a good product. You can trust Cisco, and there's support as well, which is really good." "The greatest benefit for the organization is the confidence that we are secured." "Its ability to discover attacks is a valuable feature. All of the other features that have to do with security are good." "I haven't had any major problems so I haven't had to open a ticket with technical support." "The IPS (In-plane switching) is the most valuable feature." "I like the user interface because the navigation is very easy, straightforward on your left side pane you have all the sites that you need to browse. Unlike any other firewalls, it's pretty straightforward." "We have multiple secure internal networks linked with our plants. We are from a oil company, so we have multiple plant areas which need to have restricted network access. Therefore, we are using it for restricting access to the plant area." "The initial setup was completely straightforward." | "We can open a new VPN connection easily. It's much easier than with Fortinet in our experience." "I find the solution to be user-friendly. It has a lot of reports and easy settings." "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 most valuable feature is the IPS. It also protects us from malware." "Sophos UTM has improved the porting section. It has improved security by seeing the gaps. For example, when you discover that an entry has been using a certain application, with Sophos UTM acting as a Layer 7 firewall, you can block the application, not the port." "The features that I've known to be most valuable are both the web security features as well as the web firewall capabilities. As a partner of Sophos firewall, we have some clients and they are using Sophos firewall UTM and we are using it as well." "Configuration troubleshooting is eased by the use of the color-coded, live firewall log." "It allows me to easily connect with more than forty-five remote sites and more than fifty remote users between IPsec and SSL VPN, applying the web filter and application filter to ensure a secure connection." "We find all of the features valuable because together they fit the needs of our customers." "I would recommend UTM over XG because it's easier to manage." "It is a very good product. The threat monitoring process is the most valuable feature." |
Cons | ||
"The phishing emails could be improved." "There may have been one or two incidences of malicious threats." "Some of the features, like the stability, need to be improved." "In the past though, colleagues have had issues during the upgrade process. The failover didn't work and production was down." "At times the product is sluggish and slow" "If I need to download AnyConnect in a rush, it will prompt me for my Cisco login account. Nobody wants to download a client to a firewall that they don't own." "Most of the time, when I try to run Java, it is not compatible with ASA's current operating systems." "We have to rely on Cisco ASDM to access the firewall interface. This needs improvement. Because we have a web-based interface, and it is a lot more user-friendly." | "OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server." "On the customer-side, because I'm a small business, I need a cheaper or free solution option." "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 improved by adding cloud soundboxing." "With Sophos UTM, there is a general rule in the firewall when the country blocking can block some countries from accessing your data. In the current version, you still need to add it by putting in the IP range. This feature would be helpful for administrators and it gives them the advantage to block stuff in less time." "The only time we face a problem or issues is when we place a ticket. We have found that response is very slow." "Support for IKEv2 is needed in this solution." "I would like to see the SD-WAN feature improved." "We would like to have unique viewable IDs for rules and in the packet filter logfile, for easier debugging of old log files." "It's stable, but the reaction time of the GUI is terrible." "Sophos should be more user-friendly, have more dashboards, and an easier implementation." |
Pricing and Cost Advice | ||
"Pricing is high, but it is essentially a corporate decision." "Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions." "The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market." "We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement." "Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs." "I bought a license for three years and it was really affordable." "With AnyConnect, it depends on your license. It depends on the number of concurrent users you want to connect." "This solution might be expensive, but it is economical in the long run." | "We are not paying any licensing fees. OPNsense is completely free for us." "It costs about $1000." "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." | "This solution is less expensive than FortiGate." "It is the cheapest product available. It's good if you have a low budget." "We pay for the service on a yearly basis. The last time we paid was in June, for a year. At the time, it was about $20,000." "Our licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis." "It's reasonably priced." |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs. 455,536 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||
Questions from the Community | ||
Top Answer: Cisco FW for peace of mind Top Answer: They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home… more » Top Answer: In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco. | Top Answer: The interface and the dashboard are the most valuable features of this solution. Top Answer: We are using a free version of the solution. Top Answer: There should be more technical documentation. | Top Answer: In my opinion and as a result of years of experience:
- Both are great firewalls with excellent performance and a… more » Top Answer: One other big difference is that pfSense is FreeBSD based while Sophos UTM is linux based. It is also worth having a… more » |
Popular Comparisons | ||
 Compared 34% of the time.  Compared 15% of the time. Compared 7% of the time.  Compared 5% of the time.  Compared 2% of the time. |  Compared 54% of the time.  Compared 16% of the time.  Compared 5% of the time. Compared 4% of the time.  Compared 1% of the time. | Compared 26% of the time. Compared 24% of the time. Compared 10% of the time. Compared 7% of the time. Compared 3% of the time. |
Also Known As | ||
| Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv | Astaro | |
Learn | ||
| Cisco | OPNsense Video Not Available | Sophos |
Overview  | ||
Cisco ASA firewalls deliver enterprise-class firewall functionality with highly scalable and flexible VPN 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 ASA can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Flexible VPN capabilities include support for remote access, site-to-site, and clientless VPN. Also, select appliances support clustering for increased performance, VPN load balancing to optimize available resources, advanced high availability configurations, and more. Cisco ASAv is the virtualized version of the Cisco ASA firewall. Widely deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco ASAv is ideal for remote worker and multi-tenant environments. The solution scales up/down to meet performance requirements and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco ASAv 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. | 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. | The global network of highly skilled researchers and analysts, protecting businesses from known and emerging malware - viruses, rootkits and spyware. |
Offer | ||
Learn more about Cisco ASA Firewall | Learn more about OPNsense | Learn more about Sophos UTM |
Sample Customers | ||
| There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow. | CompuNet Systems GmbH, | One Housing Group |
Top Industries | ||
Financial Services Firm17% Comms Service Provider14% Manufacturing Company10% Computer Software Company7% Comms Service Provider34% Computer Software Company22% Media Company5% Government5% | Comms Service Provider49% Computer Software Company18% Media Company5% Government4% | Manufacturing Company17% Financial Services Firm9% Retailer9% Comms Service Provider9% Comms Service Provider37% Computer Software Company20% Media Company6% Government5% |
Company Size | ||
Small Business36% Midsize Enterprise25% Large Enterprise39% Small Business27% Midsize Enterprise21% Large Enterprise52% | Small Business75% Midsize Enterprise13% Large Enterprise13% | Small Business59% Midsize Enterprise24% Large Enterprise17% Small Business50% Midsize Enterprise37% Large Enterprise13% |
Find out what your peers are saying about OPNsense vs. Sophos UTM and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
455,536 professionals have used our research since 2012.
OPNsense is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 10 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 16 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Has good performance but I want to see a friendlier user interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "Has a solid state hard drive and can boot in less than sixty seconds". OPNsense is most compared with pfSense, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos XG, Fortinet FortiGate and Kerio Control, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall and Meraki MX. See our OPNsense vs. Sophos UTM report.
See our list of .
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.