We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and OPNsense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"The response is very quick and they can visually resolve our problems in a short period."
"Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"We use the filtering feature the most. It has filtering and inbuilt securities. We can create customized rules to define which users can access a particular type of site. We can create policies inside the firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter."
"The performance is good."
"The Fortinet FortiGate local partners were good. I did not have direct contact with Fortinet support."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"I'm able to transfer data over internet network security. With the GRE I'm able to transfer data within one bunch to another bunch in a public way, like the internet. The communication is encrypted and is private. It gives me added privacy."
"The most valuable features are DNS service and shell self-service within a network."
"The stability of this solution is excellent."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"The security is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability. The nice thing with the bigger vendors is that they're very good at scale."
"Cisco Technical Assistance Center works on a follow-the-sun concept and gives real 24x7 customer support, which is a great advantage when you have a service contract with them."
"The product's stability is good."
"OPNsense is highly stable."
"OPNsense is easy to scale when running on the hardware."
"The system in general is quite flexible."
"The technical support is very good."
"It has an open license. It works very well, and there is an update every month."
"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."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"The solution is good for a basic firewall for a small business or for home use."
"Web security solutions can be improved."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"The web-cache feature which was previously on the FortiGate device, but was deleted with the recent upgrade should be returned. It was a very valuable feature for us."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"They should offer special pricing to premium partners and customers."
"There are some problems that support cannot give you a logical reason as to why it happened. For example, I had a case where I was dealing with a WhatsApp application that was giving issues. Technical support gave more than one reason it could be giving issues, but none of them solved the problem. Eventually I solved the problem, but it was far from the solutions that support had given."
"Cisco is an expensive firewall, so the pricing can be improved."
"The solution’s setup process could be better."
"There's a technology called SD-WAN that we would like to see. We are unable to handle multiple connections or to automatically load balance. I would like to have a feature that enables us to automatically prepare for load balancing."
"The graphical user interface or the GUI could be better. Beginners can use some devices with the GUI, but some security devices are configured using CLI. It would also be better if it had its own Intrusion Protection Service and Intrusion Detection Service on the server."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"I wish it would be more like the next generation firewall technology. There should be more selection between the application and filtering."
"The company needs to make its solution more affordable to make it more accessible to larger markets. Otherwise, it's seen as an enterprise-level solution that small or medium-sized organizations can't afford and therefore they won't even look at it."
"I would like to see much more embedded security that works and that isn't a bolt-on."
"Its interface should be a little bit better."
"The ability to set the VPN IP address would be a welcome addition."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"The support for OPNsense is good because we have documents available on the internet. The support could improve a little."
"There are some add-ons that need enhancements to make management easier for users, especially the reporting features. Some reports don't show the level of detail I'm looking for, and I've had trouble installing certain add-ons, especially for Internet bandwidth shaping within my company."
"The IPS solution could be more reliable."
"The interface needs to be simplified. It is not user-friendly."
"There is room for improvement in SSL inspection."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 47 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while OPNsense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS, Netgate pfSense and Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, whereas OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire. See our Cisco IOS Security 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.