Cisco's Software-Defined Access (SD-Access) provides automated end-to-end segmentation to separate user, device and application traffic without redesigning the network. Cisco SD-Access automates user access policy so organizations can make sure the right policies are established for any user or device with any application across the network.
N/A
pfSense
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
pfSense is a firewall and load management product available through the open source pfSense Community Edition, as well as a the licensed edition, pfSense Plus (formerly known as pfSense Enterprise). The solution provides combined firewall, VPN, and router functionality, and can be deployed through the cloud (AWS or Azure), or on-premises with a Netgate appliance. It as scalable capacities, with functionality for SMBs. As a firewall, pfSense offers Stateful packet inspection, concurrent…
It's well suited in our corporate offices, where all our business users resides and where we can control all their accesses. What doesn't really fit well is when we have our branch fronts, where all the software domain access features aren't utilized to its fullest, due to the fact that customers and users don't really need to have all the security features that SDA provides.
I believe PFSense is well suited for both home lab environments as well as up to small to mid-size business environments on a tight budget. However, I would implore that anything in production requires the use of the authorized hardware that PFSense sells to receive support. However, in my experience, PFSense is a solid set-and-forget firewall solution.
Easy to use. Good user interface design! Easy to understand and easy to set up.
Lower hardware requirement. 3 years ago, we used an old PC to run it. Now, we have changed to a router device with Celeron CPU and 8GB RAM. It runs smoothly with a 1000G commercial broadband.
I did kind of mention a Con in the Pro section with OpenVPN.
When I create a config for an employee other employees are able to login to that config.
I could be doing something wrong when I am making it - I am not afraid to admit that as I am pretty new to all of this, but it seems like it builds a key and I would think the key would be unique in some way to each employee, but I could be wrong.
I actually do not have a lot of Con's for this software - I did not get to set this up on our work network so I am not sure of any downfalls when installing.
I installed this on my personal machine in a Hyper-V environment to get a feel for it before I started working on it at work and it seemed pretty smooth. I didn't run into any issues.
It is difficult to start using the product due to its unfamiliar name and acronyms. ,The task should be accomplished in a specific order to ensure success
The pfSense UI is easy to navigate and pretty go look at. It is much better than some high dollar firewalls that just throw menus you you. The pfSense UI is quick and responsive and makes sense 99% of the time. Changes are committed quickly and the hardware rarely requires a reboot. It just runs.
As far as my experience with SD-Access -I'd say things that can be improved are - better functionality with ISE, ease to understand licensing and better documentation for configuration (add-ons, etc), and licensing.
I rated the training an 8 because overall, it was well-structured, and the instructor was highly knowledgeable on the subject matter. The content was relevant, and I appreciated the clear explanations of complex topics. However, I felt that some sections were covered too quickly, making it difficult to fully absorb the information before moving on. Additionally, I would have liked more time dedicated to Q&A, as there were moments when I had questions but didn’t get the opportunity to ask them due to time constraints. Adding more interactive discussions or hands-on exercises could further enhance the learning experience and make it even more engaging
Automation, pushing template-based configuration to multiple devices in one push saves time and manpower. Assurance helps trace issues related to devices, clients, and provide the troubleshoot as the best practices. Segmentation, with the use of the SGT tags, we are able to achieve segmentation and micro-segmentation securely.
Meraki has a unified management login for all devices, which is nice. It also has decent content filtering, both areas where pfSense is weaker. Where pfSense far ouclasses Meraki is in the ease of use and the other width of features. These include features such as better VPN interoperability, non-subscription based pricing, auditability, not relying on the infrastructure of a third party, more transparency of what's actually going on, easier to deploy replacements if hardware fails. Additionally, the NAT management for pfSense seems to be a bit better, as you can NAT between any network segment and not just the LAN segments out the WAN interfaces.
pfSense can be installed on commodity hardware with no licensing fees. With a simple less than 10 minute restore time, on most hardware, it's an extremely inexpensive way to achieve the same results that some of the more expensive vendors provide.
The easy to use interface has allowed configuration management to be preformed by lower level technicians with quick and easy training.
