OpenVPN Access Server Reviews

I used OpenVPN Access Server to get into a special network and used some keys to access virtual machines. We also used it to try and run some pen tests.

I like that it's easy to use, easy to download, and not hard to manage.

The connections could be faster and more stable.

I used OpenVPN Access Server briefly, probably for a week or two.

OpenVPN Access Server is a stable solution. But sometimes, it would crash if the connection was left on for too long. But this wasn't a problem for us.

OpenVPN Access Server was scalable for ten users in my team. I don't know how it will be beyond that. 

The initial setup was straightforward. It took about 15 minutes to deploy this solution.

I implemented this solution.

OpenVPN Access Server was free for students. I don't know if you have to pay for an advanced version.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give OpenVPN Access Server a nine.

I use OpenVPN Access Server for my private network area and analytics. It makes it easier to log into my network.

I like that it's free.

It could be faster. It could also be more stable.

I have been using OpenVPN Access Server for three years.

It could be more stable.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give stability a seven.

The initial setup is a bit complicated, but it's not an issue if you Google it.

I implemented this solution by myself. 

OpenVPN Access Server is free and open source.

I would tell potential users that OpenVPN Access Server is best for small businesses.

This is an enterprise infrastructure VPN solution. 

It is very stable and reliable. It's a useful device. 

It is very easy to look at the quality of the connection and the bandwidth and do an investigation if there are problems on the network.

It is simple to set up and deploy. 

It's compatible with WatchGuard. 

There sometimes is an incompatibility between some VPNs. 

I've been using the solution for two or three years. It hasn't been a long time. 

We have found the stability to be good. It is reliable. here are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I'm not sure of the scalability. I've never tried to scale the product. 

We have three customers on the solution right now. 

We are able to manage the support of the solution and troubleshoot for clients. However, I have never dealt with the solution's technical support services in the past. 

As solutions providers, we deal with a lot of VPN technology. For example, I have worked with FortiClient. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. For example, I find it easier to implement than FortiClient.

The deployment is fast. It takes five to ten minutes. After that, you can put in the customer's configurations. 

If the customer gives you the HTTP link for the certificate and the configuration, you enter everything on that site, and automatically, you are good to go.

We handle the maintenance for our clients. 

We've been able to implement the solution for clients for a while now. 

I don't have details related to licensing. The customer typically deals with that directly. 

We sell software solutions. 

I'd recommend the product to other users. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. 

OpenVPN is an excellent candidate for establishing secure point-to-point connections between home office locations and satellite locations. It can be configured to limit exposure of the network, from just between the specific endpoints, all the way to full access between local area networks. Performance is consistent and positive. Security has been outstanding, passing some of the greatest tests we've put them to regulating bodies looking for vulnerabilities. If you're looking for a solid solution to establish VPN tunnels between sites, be sure to put OpenVPN on your list to check out.

OpenVPN has allowed me to have the ability to VPN into my environment from anywhere, using Open Source technologies, which helps me control my costs. My clients have capitalized on it when WAN alternatives were too expensive to consider. Yes, there are appliance equivalents out there, but for full customization and low cost, you can't beat it, in my opinion.

The features I have found to be most valuable are the levels of encryption I can enact and the compression I can apply to improve throughput. Obviously, the higher the level of encryption the more difficult it will be to intercept valuable content; and of course, the more we can compress data through the tunnel, the higher the level of relative throughput we can achieve.

The product is fully customized through configuration files, which is all achieved through manual data entry. This is where it becomes unattractive. If there was a Graphical User Interface to help streamline the configuration, I believe OpenVPN would probably venture more into the non-geek realm as it were. What I mean by this is, if there was a form-driven configuration process, like a "File -> Settings" kind of thing, where the end user can enter data into fields to specify the connection specifics, e.g. hostname/IP Address, protocols, etc. that could be written into the config file in the background, similar to what you see in YaST over in openSuSE in some of the services area, etc., and basically foolproof the VPN configuration, you may see more GUI-oriented folks using OpenVPN. Of course in saying this, I anticipate what's going to happen: "Well, give it a try, Elliott!" I'd love to, but my programming skills aren't there yet - I'm a "Edit the file" guy...

I have had a hard time trying to get OpenVPN to crash. I have achieved it on occasion when I am constantly breaking connectivity between the hosts, which I only do when I'm experimenting with things. Otherwise, once your configuration is stable, the tunnel remains stable.

Scalability, as far as I can tell thus far, is limited to the hardware capabilities of your Linux router or host from which you intend to run OpenVPN.

I cannot recall whether I worked with customer support on OpenVPN; being an Open Source project, when you have questions, you really end up working with fellow users in the OSS community. That being said, I can also say that the documentation for OpenVPN is outstanding. It gives you a full explanation of the product and case examples of how it can be applied. From there, you really need to start experimenting with it and post questions to the forums. You will find that people will respond and help you through your issues. People are happy to help out with products they've come to enjoy, and OpenVPN is one of those, as I think you'll find out.

Prior to OpenVPN, I've had some experience with SonicWALL VPN, Fortinet, and CiscoVPN. All of these are fine alternatives, and I rarely experienced a problem using them. The big push for me to look at OpenVPN came when I started to work in heterogeneous environments, using both Windows and Linux.

As I started to discover the options available through the Linux platform, I naturally continued to expand my curiosity and experiment with the options I found. In many cases, I found some that were okay, but too unstable to really consider, and in others, I found outstanding products developed by some brilliant people.

OpenVPN became the perfect solution for me when I tried to connect two DRBD farms together and needed to encrypt the data stream between the two. It made sense to use the product from the host responsible for managing the DRBD stack, and simply add the remote farm via the tunnel. I then began to see other opportunities where I could apply it, and finally jumped in full force.

Going through the setup for the first time will be a challenge. What I have done is write down a procedure to follow, that I have used every time since. I make modifications from time to time, as new features have been introduced, or old features have been replaced. Having a working set of config files available to use as a basis to build out new tunnels have been a blessing, too!

The project I described previously, I developed on my own. I was then hired by my clients to deploy the solution for them. To be honest, I knew nothing about OpenVPN when I started, but I was able to come up to speed pretty quickly. And if I was able to do it, I have no doubt you can be successful, too!

Overall, I believe the ROI is high. The initial investment can be costly, as you go through the process of learning the application. But in the long run, you gain more than just financial benefits; the intellectual knowledge gained can be invaluable.

With regard to setup cost, pricing and/or licensing, the simple answer is that you'll need to set aside some time to learn it and experiment with it. That's the only cost you will incur, with the exception of freeing up some hardware on which you can install Linux. OpenVPN is freely available through all of the major distributions. My experience thus far has been with openSUSE, which is a great platform for you to explore.

In my DRBD example above, I couldn't find a solution without introducing additional hardware between the two farms that either complicated access from authorized hosts or potentially impacted performance. I really needed it to occur at the point of management: the DRBD master of the farm. So, when I am asked, "Did you evaluate other options?", the short answer is "Yes", but on paper only; none of them could accomplish what I needed to achieve.

You can see a quick description of the DRBD project I mentioned on my website along with a graphic showing the layout of it. Visit http://www.scottsolutions.us/p... for more details.

The solution is used to connect to the server or network when working remotely.

Security is the most valuable feature.

The interface can be more user-friendly.

The stability had room for improvement.

The scalability has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I give the stability a five out of ten.

I give the scalability a six out of ten.

The implementation was completed in-house.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is connecting to multiple servers.

This solution is good overall.

This solution should improve the connection speed and the user interface. The stability of this solution should be improved as well.

In the next release, I would like to see the user interface become more user-friendly.

I have been using this solution for about one year.

I would rate this solution's stability an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

My impression is that this is a scalable solution.

My impression is that the initial setup is straightforward. It took about 15 minutes to deploy this solution.

The implementation was done by our IT department.

Overall, I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would recommend this solution to other people.

Initially, we implemented this OpenVPN client. We have Google Authenticator with OpenVPN, so we have multifactor authentication for the users.

The best thing is that it is open source and free of cost.

It's secure.

It's a good solution for small firms. 

You do need expertise in implementation if you do the initial setup yourself. As it is open-source, if you run into issues, there is nobody available to help you. 

We can have more interfaces with the Active Directory. For example, if you want to integrate, it's not really working very well as an authentication method. 

Security-wise it's using good protocols like SecureONE, similar to AnyConnect. However, implementation-wise for the interfacing to the AD and interfacing to the Authenticators, it's a bit difficult. We had updated this a year before, and we had to revert it back to work with Google Authenticator.

I've been using the solution for about five years or so.

While it is stable, I would warn that while doing the updates, there is a concern. If you are doing an update, you should have a full backup and consider the functionality so that it runs as expected. You might have to redeploy the product again in order to do a proper update. 

We have maybe 50 to 100 users on the solution. It's a small server. It might be able to scale a bit more, however, we haven't really tried to do that.

We have the free version installed. We don't have a support contract.

The initial setup is complex. 

We tried initially with Centaurus and it was not really working. 

The deployment itself took about three weeks. It was a bit time-consuming. 

It's free to use. We have an open-source version. 

You would need to pay extra for support. It's not as costly as Cisco or Fortinet, and therefore investing a bit extra in support may be worth it. 

The solution is at a client location. I'm not sure which version they're on. 

It's critical to understand the solution if you decide to use it, and if it is a necessary solution that you need to depend on, you should have some sort of support contract in place. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

OpenVPN Access Server provides remote secure access. 

OpenVPN Access Server needs to have fewer updates. 

OpenVPN Access Server is stable. 

The tool is scalable. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. It took ten minutes to complete. 

OpenVPN Access Server is a cheap corporate solution. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten.