Cisco Umbrella vs pfSense

• Cisco Umbrella protects our devices and users from malicious sites of all kinds.
• Cisco Umbrella allows us to add additional web site types we may want to block for specific users.
• Cisco Umbrella keeps the list of sites blocked current by utilizing data from their entire security platform.

Read full review

• pfSense is an excellent firewall - It logs all of your traffic. It has packages you can install to snort bad traffic.
• pfSense has a tool called "p0f" which allows you to see what type of OS is trying to connect to you. You can filter these results and you can also block a specific OS from connecting to you.
• pfSense is an excellent load-balancer: (Multi-WAN and Server Load Balancing) The fail-over/aggregation works very well. This is perfect if your business uses multiple ISP's to ensure your customers are always able to access their data. Also helps with bandwidth distribution as well.
• VPN's - I am not entirely sure if this package was free with pfSense, but it does offer the ability to use OpenVPN which is what I am familiar with.
• They also have IPsec in the settings as well, but I am not familiar with that enough to go into any detail with it.
• As I mentioned I do use OpenVPN the only thing I don't care for with it is I can create OpenVPN configs for each user I want to be able to VPN into the network and I assumed each one would be "unique" but this does not seem to be the case. I could be doing it wrong, but if I create a config for a specific employee I would expect only that employee should be able to use that config, but I have been able to login to everyone that I made using my credentials.
• I mentioned earlier that pfSense had a GUI.
• I personally really think it is cool because it has a bunch of reporting graphs for monitoring your networks. I think when I become the full-time admin at the company I am going to try to talk them into getting me a TV I can mount on the wall and display all the graphs and real-time info pfSense shows so I can monitor what is going on with the network(s) at all times. Plus I think it would look rad.

Read full review

• Keeping up to date on known malicious sites and blocking those is difficult for all vendors, but this could always be improved upon.
• A more detailed descriptions of what is included the Security Categories would be useful. Generic descriptions are provided. For example, state lottery sites could be detailed in the description of the Gambling category.

Read full review

• There is no API for making changes. This can be a hindrance in environments where auto-deploying something needs firewall rules or HAProxy configs updated. Since all settings are stored in an XML file and then configs are generated from that, even manually updating config files cannot be done.
• Beware that some network cards can have issues. pfSense is based on FreeBSD, so it's best to look on their compatibility list before deploying.

Read full review

• On the positive side, the product does help block known bad sites, resulting in less time that technicians spend cleaning infections.
• On the negative side, the problem that causes Windows to incorrectly report no Internet access has taken a lot of time for many technicians.
• Reporting features for individual clients help us more efficiently provide browsing reports when needed.

Read full review

• Moving to a FWaaS solution installed on a decent computer the initial investment was moderate to cover 50 to 250 users, but still being cheaper that a Fortinet, Cisco ASA, or a Sophos UTM.
• Paying only for support can be a double edge knife, cause you need to identify what's the goal of the request, or your drown into a an endless list of requirements.
• To stay in the top with the half of a regular investment pFSense gives a wide variety of plugins that will give you a deep knowledge of your security flaws and strong points.

Read full review