Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs pfSense

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 4 reviews vs pfSense which is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 22 reviews. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "A reliable tool with excellent support". The top reviewer of pfSense writes "The performance and functionality are good. I can manage it easily by myself". Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX Firewalls and Juniper SRX. pfSense is most compared with Sophos UTM, Fortinet FortiGate and Cisco ASA. See our Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs pfSense report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
+Add products to compare
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs pfSense and others in Firewalls.
278,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Quotes From Members Comparing Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs pfSense

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
It is reliable and the support is very good.In the newer version, there are 3850s, all of them are scalable. They fit better into the medium or small businesses.They now know the details about their network traffic that they did not know before: Applications that they are using and some application they did not know they were using.A solid operating system with all the necessary data center security features.We have reduced the number of configuration lines by 90%. We need fewer number of admins right now because of it.It scales linearly with load and no issues.We now know a lot more detail about what our users are doing on the network.It is very stable. It is fairly easy to use.

Read more »

Stability has been excellent. We have experienced no issues; it never fails.Its features rival many of the high cost solutions out there.The initial setup was straightforward, therefore I wanted to continue using the product.I can manage it easily by myself.The performance and functionality are good.Creation of certificates and the facility to administer services are valuable features.It is a good firewall with good performance.Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security.

Read more »

Cons
From time to time, they have released some content updates that have some issues, maybe twice a year.There are various reports that come with the box or with the VMware, but you can only run them daily.All areas need improvement: manufacturing, education, financial, etc.The user-friendliness of the UI could be improved.The interface is all Java-based. I would prefer an HTML5 interface.Just sometimes it can be a bit sluggish navigating through pages. That is just purely because of Java.​

Read more »

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 GUI could use improvements, though it is manageable.A malware blocker should be included. I do not know if it is included yet. However, until now, we have not experienced a large malware invasion.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.Needs services on additional features, such as managing inventory and generating reports.My only observation is about the quality of the IPSec logs, which are difficult to interpret and are poor in filters.​Improve analysis of logs and dashboards (control panel) with improved alert functionality.It should integrate with LDAP, Active Directory, etc, to improve the way in which the traces and connections of each IP, or user connected through the firewall, are shown.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
I know Palo Alto is not cheap. They have been telling me, the members of the finance team, it is not a cheap solution. It is a solution whose target is that no matter how big your organization is, small, medium, or large, it is about the maturity of your security team or infrastructure team whom you want to work with.It is a little bit of crazy if you compare it to Vanguard, Sophos, or even Cisco. The newest version of Cisco, the Next-Generation Firewall of Cisco, is less expensive than Palo Alto. It is more comparable to Check Point.For licensing, It depends how they want to use the firewall. The firewall can be used only for IPS purposes. If you only want that firewall IPSs, you will only need a license that is called threat prevention. That license, threat prevention, includes vulnerabilities, antivirus signatures and one additional measure (that I can't remember), but it includes three measures and security updates.The box, if you do not want to buy the threat prevention license in the box, you can buy it only with the support license. It is for the support of the hardware. It works like a simple firewall. It integrates what it calls user IDs and application IDs. If you do not buy any other license, only the firewall, Palo Alto will also help you improve a lot of your security.​The licensing is pretty much like everyone else.When you have a client compare box against box, a lot of times Palo Alto is a bit more expensive, but its network firewalls have a very rich ratio.Do not buy larges box if you do not need them. Rightsizing is a great task to do before​hand.For what you get, it does do what it says. It is a good value for an enterprise firewall.​

Read more »

It is a free solution.It is economical (i.e., free).From Sonic Wall, their price is much higher, because for every feature that you want to add, you have to pay. I can do the same things with pfSense, but everything is included in one price.There are a few features not included, and when you have to use those features, you have to pay for them.It is an open source solution. Therefore, the price is good.It works quite well for an open source product.If you need to buy hardware onto which to install PfSense, go with their boxes on their website, they are great.It's open source (and free - as in beer and speech), but also has commercial support.

Read more »

Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs pfSense and others in Firewalls.
278,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
RANKING
Views
808
Comparisons
443
Reviews
3
Followers
82
Avg. Rating
9.0
Views
63,772
Comparisons
45,445
Reviews
19
Followers
3,047
Avg. Rating
8.6
Top Comparisons
Top ComparisonsSee more Palo Alto Networks VM-Series competitors »
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
See more pfSense competitors »
Website/Video
Website/VideoPalo Alto Networks
pfSense
Overview
Overview

The VM-Series is a virtualized form factor of our next-generation firewall that can be deployed in a range of private and public cloud computing environments based on technologies from VMware, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, Citrix and KVM.

The VM-Series natively analyzes all traffic in a single pass to determine the application identity, the content within, and the user identity. These core elements of your business can then be used as integral components of your security policy, enabling you to improve your security efficacy through a positive control model and reduce your incident response time though complete visibility into applications across all ports.

In both private and public cloud environments, the VM-Series can be deployed as a perimeter gateway, an IPsec VPN termination point, and a segmentation gateway, protecting your workloads with application enablement and threat prevention policies.

Providing comprehensive network security solutions for the enterprise, large business and SOHO, pfSense solutions bring together the most advanced technology available to make protecting your network easier than ever before. Our products are built on the most reliable platforms and are engineered to provide the highest levels of performance, stability and confidence.
OFFER
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series
Learn more about pfSense
Sample Customers
Sample CustomersWarren Rogers AssociatesNerds On Site Inc., RKC Development Inc., Expertech, Fisher's Technology, Ncisive, Consulting, CPURX, Vaughn's Computer House Calls, Imeretech LLC, Digital Crisis, Carolina Digital Phone, Technigogo Technology Services, The Simple Solution, SwiftecITInc, Rocky Mountain Tech Team, Free Range Geeks, Alaska Computer Geeks, Lark Information Technology, Renaissance Systems Inc., Cutting Edge Computers, Caretech LLC, GoVanguard, Network Touch Ltd, P.C. Solutions.Net, Vision Voice and Data Systems LLC, Montgomery Technologies, Techforce, Concero Networks, ASONInc, CPS Electronics and Consulting, Darkwire.net LLC, IT Specialists, MBS-Net Inc., VOICE1 LLC, Advantage Networking Inc., Powerhouse Systems, Doxa Multimedia Inc., Pro Computer Service, Virtual IT Services, A&J Computers Inc., Envision IT LLC, CommunicaONE Inc., Bone Computer Inc., Amax Engineering Corporation, QPG Ltd. Co., IT 101 Inc., Perfect Cloud Solutions, Applied Technology Group Inc., The Digital Sun Group LLC, Firespring
Top Industries
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider
16%
University
16%
Energy/Utilities Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Company Size
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business
68%
Midsize Enterprise
20%
Large Enterprise
12%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
39%
Midsize Enterprise
38%
Large Enterprise
23%
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs pfSense and others in Firewalls.
Download now
278,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.

Sign Up with Email