pfSense Room for Improvement

Ray Ost
CEO at Private
Some suggestions for improvement of pfSense are: * Adjustment in the interfaces: I had to adjust those interfaces manually and of course that is a great feature that you can restore it but it is immediately also one point for improvement. If you don't have to adjust, if it's just stamped and it works, that's great. * With regard to the Community Edition, when I installed it, we use Proxmox as an equivalent of PMWorks and I installed the Community Edition in Proxmox. That was very difficult to get to work at first. A lot of tweaking. That is very, very not easy. * When I'm inside of my network and I go to a URL, the URL points to a server inside my network. It doesn't hang, but I don't get a response. It just stays blank. * I can imagine that inside my network, I am going outside, and it points to the public address, so I can reach it. With eSoft, without any adjustment, it worked, and I was able to do that. I went to search pfSense for an option, and I had some documents open to read about how it is done, but it isn't clear enough. It's not that easy. I would appreciate it if I could get easy help on that. View full review »
IT Manager & Sr. Application Programmer with 11-50 employees
While I agree spam filtering is not included or an option with the system, I don't necessarily hold that against the product as there are a number of other services that do it far better than a firewall could. If you use Office 365, Microsoft's implementations are likely to be far superior to what you'll get from a firewall. However, with that said, the one item I wish it included, even if it was a subscription-based service, is the inclusion of an AV and/or threat intelligence. This would elevate the solution well above other alternatives. View full review »
Koen Van Cauwenberghe
Network and Office Manager with 11-50 employees
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. There are a few features not included, and when you have to use those features, you have to pay for them. I know that I should change the current pfSense solution. I should change it because we have only one key port on it. Our internet access also has a key port now, I should have two key ports, one to the LAN and one to the WAN. Therefore, I want to change it, because it gives us less speed. I could provide the speed, but there are not two key ports on it. Therefore, I now have to choose a new pfSense solution, or I could look at another vendor similar to what we have. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about pfSense, Sophos, Fortinet and others in Firewalls. Updated: January 2020.
396,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Reinhardt Jansen
Senior Systems Administrator at a non-tech company with 51-200 employees
Layer 7 filtering has been taken away from pfSense. They would like us to use Snort, which is a good thing, but I would like them to make the Layer 7 thing easier. The one reason that we did not go with pfSense is that it is not centrally managed like Meraki, where you log into the website and can see all your services there. This is the only reason why we are going with Meraki. We would like to be able to see is all the configurations from a central interface on all our pfSenses. View full review »
Haytham Tarek
Founder and MD at Smart Solution
It has everything I need, but the main drawback of pfSense is that it's not user-friendly. I hope to have something to make the interfaces more user-friendly. I would also like to see some documentation that can help with use cases or that has advice and tips. I have found some documentation available but it's usually from an earlier version. If they develop this, pfSense will be the best. The only thing that Fortigate is better than pfSense is that they have 24/7 support. pfSense also needs improvements in the intrusion detection area. View full review »
Anders Olsson
Systems Administrator at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
* The central point of management, like the long-rumored pfCenter. * Better parsing of logs: At the moment, you have to use an external server for this if you want a deeper analysis. View full review »
Alfredo Cornell
Chief Technology Officer at Xpro Networks
I would like to see SD1 integration into the software. That would be fantastic. View full review »
student at a university with 51-200 employees
The product is good in many of its departments, but this should make HTTPS filtering more efficient since Squid falls short when using man in the middle. It works, but it is not 100% efficient. 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. View full review »
Ross Bennett
Senior Systems Engineer at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
* I would like to see multiple DNS servers running on individual interfaces. * It would be useful to manage firewall policies on a source interface and destination interface basis. View full review »
Mervin Sosa
Services on additional features: * SNMP Network Management * Managing inventory * Generating IT reports. View full review »
IT Manager with 1-10 employees
We would like to see ready-made profiles to cover most users' needs. View full review »
Jaco Lange
Managing Director with 51-200 employees
This product needs improvements with respect to reporting and auditing. View full review »
More regular patch updates, because this is very important for a firewall. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about pfSense, Sophos, Fortinet and others in Firewalls. Updated: January 2020.
396,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.