Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. pfSense
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 2nd in Advanced Threat Protection with 10 reviews vs pfSense which is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 23 reviews. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "At the end of the day, even in spite ofapplication controls, it's on top of the charts in terms of functionality". The top reviewer of pfSense writes "The performance and functionality are good. I can manage it easily by myself". Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA and Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls. pfSense is most compared with Sophos UTM, Fortinet FortiGate and Cisco ASA. See our Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. pfSense report.
+Add products to compare
Based on 10 reviews. | Based on 23 reviews. |
Most Helpful Review | ||||||
|
| Use Null Product? Share your opinion. | ||||
 Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. pfSense and others in Advanced Threat Protection. 300,473 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||||||
Quotes From Members Comparing Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. pfSense
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:Pros | ||
Being an application-based firewall, this is one of the critical focus factors along with the threat prevention services it provides. It is stable and pretty much scalable. The cloud-based services are a nice feature. My primary use case for this solution is for a secure gateway. The reporting feature helps our performance. Their technical support is outstanding and top-notch. It catches modified signatures of known viruses. Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones has improved my organization. | Super easy to manage. Anyone who has been working with firewalls can handle it. There is good documentation with a fantastic community and enterprise support. The ability to perform packet captures on the command line and via the GUI is useful for diagnosing problems. It is easy to manage. I don't have to have highly trained engineers. A mid-level employee who is conversant with firewalls can take care of managing it. The IPsec and VPN services, as well as the interoperability with other solutions such as Cisco, Juniper, and Palo Alto have been invaluable. 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. | |
Cons | ||
As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity. The initial setup was complex. I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power. I would give this product a rating of 9 out of 10 due to some slight issues of performance. They should make their user interface a little more user-friendly. The VPN and decryption need improvement. They provide a medium level of technical support. The data analytical system for deployment needs to improve. | It needs better parsing of logs. At the moment, you have to use an external server for this if you want a deeper analysis. I would like to see multiple DNS servers running on individual interfaces. They need to take care of a few issues with the GUI. Occasionally, they don't update the configurations properly. I would also like them to firm up the VPN aspect of the software a bit and provide better monitoring software. When a carrier that supports a VPN or IPsec tunnel bounces, the recovery time can take a few minutes. Reducing that time would be greatly appreciated in future releases. 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. | |
Pricing and Cost Advice | ||
It is a reasonable price compared to other solutions on the market. The pricing is OK, it is not too expensive. More expensive than other firewalls. It is expensive, a feature more accessible to enterprise class customers, but provides an enhanced possibility that Zero- or near-Zero-day threats may be identified and mitigated. The cost of the product weighed against the potential impact of even one successful crypto malware-type exploit may justify the expense. The pricing and licensing option should be categorized for various countries such as for Bangladesh. It's not particularly cheap, but it is absolutely worth it. It IS a bit expensive, but I think you get what you pay for. Value is there. | All costs are low compared to other solutions. The hardware is stable and cheap. There is no licensing fee except for the enterprise support, if you want it. This solution was about $150,000 cheaper than the closest competitor over a three year period. In comparison to a lot of other solutions, it's very inexpensive. It is a great solution that is economical. It scales so the cost per protected MB is almost free. 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. | Information Not Available |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection solutions are best for your needs. 300,473 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||
Ranking | ||
Views 73,209 Comparisons 43,267 Reviews 7 Followers 2,631 Avg. Rating 9.1 | Views 80,677 Comparisons 49,200 Reviews 23 Followers 2,889 Avg. Rating 8.7 | Views 0 Comparisons 0 Reviews 1 Followers 1 Avg. Rating 5.0 |
Top Comparisons | ||
 Compared 32% of the time.  Compared 15% of the time. Compared 8% of the time. |  Compared 29% of the time. Compared 17% of the time. Compared 8% of the time. |  Compared 53% of the time.  Compared 47% of the time. |
Website/Video | ||
| Palo Alto Networks | pfSense | Null Vendor |
Overview  | ||
| WildFire™ cloud-based threat analysis service is the industry’s most advanced analysis and prevention engine for highly evasive zero-day exploits and malware. The cloud-based service employs a unique multi-technique approach combining dynamic and static analysis, innovative machine learning techniques, and a groundbreaking bare metal analysis environment to detect and prevent even the most evasive threats. | 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. | Information Not Available |
OFFER | ||
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks WildFire | Learn more about pfSense | Learn more about Null Product |
Sample Customers | ||
| Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation | Nerds 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 | Information Not Available |
Top Industries | ||
VISITORS READING REVIEWS 18% 10% 10% 6% | REVIEWERS 19% 14% 10% 10% VISITORS READING REVIEWS 15% 9% 8% 6% | No Data Available |
Company Size | ||
REVIEWERS 69% 6% 25% VISITORS READING REVIEWS 24% 29% 48% | REVIEWERS 66% 21% 13% VISITORS READING REVIEWS 40% 37% 23% | No Data Available |
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. pfSense and others in Advanced Threat Protection.
300,473 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also Palo Alto Networks WildFire Reviews, pfSense Reviews, and our list of Best Advanced Threat Protection Companies.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection 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 in to see all reviews and comparisons. It's free!
By clicking Sign in with LinkedIn™ you agree to let IT Central Station use your LinkedIn profile
and email address in accordance with our Privacy Policy and agree to the Terms of Service.
- Unlimited access to 21000+ reviews from real users
- Your own page to promote your professional skills
- Networking events and peer-to-peer consultations
Already a member? Sign in.
By registering, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
- Unlimited access to 21000+ reviews from real users
- Your own page to promote your professional skills
- Networking events and peer-to-peer consultations
Already a member? Sign In.