KerioControl Reviews

We are using the latest version. 

We have many customer sites and the solution gives us control over bandwidth internet.

I consider all of the features to be valuable. 

The solution should offer more dashboards. 

I have been using Kerio Control for ten or fifteen years. 

The stability is fine. 

The scalability is fine. 

The technical support is good.

The installation is straightforward. We have done this many times. 

We have three IT support engineers.

The price is fine. Our customers pay for their licenses annually. 

I would certainly recommend the solution to others. 

We have between 200 and 750 customers. 

I rate Kerio Control as a nine out of ten. 

I find this solution to be rich in features and does all that I require. For example, it is easily manageable and has comprehensive virus detection. 

I have used the solution for approximately ten years. 

I have not had any problems with the stability of the solution, It is very stable. My clients are mainly small size companies. 

I find the solution scalable. 

My experience with the solutions technical support is fine but they could be faster in responding.

I have tried a Zyxel Firewall product. 

I found the initial setup to be easy. 

The price of the solution is reasonable. For additional costs, you can add on more features such as antivirus.

For those who want a good firewall solution, this is the one.

I rate Kerio Control a nine out of ten.

Our primary use cases are for internet connectivity, security, and VPNs.

The VPN connections have improved my organization. It also means that I can manage security more easily.

The most valuable feature is the VPN. It enables us to do remote work. 

I use the geo IP filtering a lot. 

We also like the security. We can control what sites users can go to and we can make sure that where they're going is appropriate and that it's work-related.

Quality of service and bandwidth management need improvement. It just doesn't seem granular in that.

The denial of service could also be improved. There recently was a big issue with denial of service attacks and it was a bit laborious.

I have been using Kerio Control since 2016. 

It's stable and we rarely have any reliability issues.

It is scalable up to a point that then you might have to use a user faster, bigger one, but on the whole, it is scalable. It's because based most installations I have are over 300. Whereas if they start to get really big, you'll need to increase the model to the next model up.

In my company, it's me that manages and installs them all. We install, manage, and offer basic management and support.

The environments we've installed for can go from three to 50 users.

We've never had any problems with it not being able to manage the traffic.

The GFI technical support is average. The speed of response sometimes is not very fast. Sometimes they take a while to resolve an issue. For example, I've got an issue that's not been resolved for three months now, meaning that the box, the unit isn't performing as it should do.

My clients generally replace solutions like SonicWall and Fortinet with Kerio but sometimes they don't have a firewall at all, so we set them up with their first firewall.

It's easier when all our customers are using the same firewall. It makes it easier for us to manage them across the board. We use Kerio across the board.

We used to use a lot of Fortinet but now we've replaced that with Kerio because of the support and price, although now the support is not so good. The price is fair and the features are all pretty much the same.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's a bit tricky because I do it a lot, but it's pretty straightforward. It has a Wizard if you need it, but I don't need it anymore. I know what I'm doing. I find it quite easy to set up.

A basic deployment takes an hour. Just the box standards are set out for everybody, and then if they need something specific, we'll add it in afterward. But a straightforward, standard, basic setup takes about an hour.

We have a unified implementation strategy that we start with and then we tweak it if need be. We don't use MyKerio to put a standard implementation across all of them.

Our standard implementation strategy is to implement dual internet connections, standards, and standard traffic rules with VPN access.

At the end of the day, our customers are being managed, looked after, and they're secure, so they're happy.

The licensing is a bit of an issue. People don't like to have to buy user licenses. They think they should be able to buy the box and be able to use it. Licensing is a bit old fashioned in terms of the fact that if they don't renew the license that box becomes useless. People really don't like that. Then they can't use it anymore.

My advice would be to make sure you've got an internet connection. The first thing you have to do is register the user on the internet and then if you get to a new installation where you're setting them up from scratch, you're going to struggle because with the new Kerio unit, the first thing it needs to do is connect to the internet and it can't do that if you haven't set it up. It's best to get it set up before you install it on site.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using the solution is not to assume everything is running okay because it might not be. The main reason is because of the denial of service not being up to scratch. You have to make sure that their connections aren't being kept of denial of service effects. That's the problem right now. I would say denial of service is probably one of the weakest areas.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We do quite a special deployment. I work on superyachts. My clients, basically have various ways to forward their internet connection, either by satellite, or, if they're within the range of the shore, they use 4G and a multitude of other connections. Kerio provides for an easy way to manage the various connections. Also, because of the limited bandwidth of the vessels using VSAT, they have control of internet traffic.

With Kerio Control, one very useful feature is the policy routing. This enables us to, if we have the yacht's network split up into VLANs, give the option of basically pushing different VLANs through different internet connections. This is very flexible. Then the PFM and the Netgate firewalls are also very flexible. 

The user interface and the ease of use are pretty good. Everything fits together so nicely.

The one thing that did put me off of the solution was that, after they were taken over by GFI, the licensing and a few other items have gotten very complicated. 

I am just a little bit wary as to the future of the Kerio Control. I do like open source. I think open source is the future. I don't think there is any place for proprietaries and if I can use something as open source, I would prefer to use open source.

I never found I missed anything in terms of features. From a user point of view, because I install these things and put them on a yacht, then the people on board, they're the ones that have to manage it once the installation is done. That means I have to train them, and, as long as they understand what they need to do and how to use I'm they'll be fine. That said, it can be a bit complicated for a novice user. A simpler user interface is necessary.

I've been using the solution for years.

I've never tried to scale the solution. In my case, it doesn't make sense to try. My installations are very finite. The yacht doesn't grow, so it's very self-contained.

I haven't contacted technical support in the past, to be honest. I'm the kind of person that I would rather look things up online. The beauty of working in IT is that a lot of problems you come across have already been witnessed. Someone else has come across them and has already posted solutions online for you to find. I'm not one of these people that tends to call help desks. I used to work on help desks quite a lot myself, so I am well versed in troubleshooting.

We have experience with pfSense. 

With Kerio, everything is just a bit more cohesive. Everything fits together. With pfSense, you need to install add-ons to get the features you need. You can have the same features as Kerio, but it may require installing an add-on. With Kerio, of course, everything is already there.

Another very nice feature I like with the pfSense firewall is the ability to actually run a packet capture on the router, on the gateway itself. Thatis something very useful that I miss having access to, as it's not available on Kerio.

The initial installation's level of difficulty all depends on the requirements of the customer. Some customers just want it there so that they can actually monitor and see the traffic usage, and, if necessary, they can go and speak to people and ask them to stop using up so much data. Some clients use it more as a deterrent and just as a way of monitoring what's going on. Other clients like even more control, which can make it a bit more complicated. They want to put in quotas for users and block certain sites, which is possible, and just a bit more work. It will all depend on clients.

Deployment typically can be done within one day. However, a lot of time users may be upgrading the whole network with wifi switches. Everything gets built together. For us, we're trading our gateway and our networks on board. It shouldn't take more than a few days for a full network installation.

I am self-employed, so I work with other companies that usually do the installation of the hardware and I come in at the end to just make sure everything's all configured correctly and set up properly for Kerio configuration.

I'd recommend the solution. 

It is a good solution. I would like to use it more as an open source software these days. The way everything is going in the world, I feel that there's definitely a place for open source. In terms of the proprietary side of it, I'm not too keen on it, and I'm a bit dubious about this takeover by GFI. I don't know if it's a product that will carry on as it is or if things will just keep getting a bit more complicated with it.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It's done everything I've ever needed it to do. That said, if I can find a solution that does the same, I'll switch. I find that there are actually more options. If you know what you're doing and you find the add-on that you need, then I think it's more flexible.

Our primary uses for this solution are to control internet use, filter sites, and manage bandwidth.

It prevents people from visiting undesirable sites and ensures that they use the internet for their designated jobs.

The most valuable feature is the web filter.

Improvements are needed to the Next Generation Firewall Protection, specifically with user-level protection.

Our primary use case for this solution is a UTM (Unified Threat Management) router.

This solution gives me confidence in the ability to quickly recover from hardware failures.

What I like the most about Kerio is that I can use the software appliance as a solution, so if the hardware fails for any reason then I can quickly replace it with hardware that I have in stock. Typically, I use a Dell OptiPlex i5 desktop or small form factor.

Their support is getting better but still needs improvement. I had been using Kerio products for quite a few years before GFI purchased them.  What liked about the support was that the people you contacted were actually using the product in their homes, they played with the product and broke it and fixed so understood it well. GFI support folks at the first level are script readers and point you to documents you can find on the support website. For me, I have gone down that path already when I opened a ticket. 

I see they have phone support now, but I have not used it.

I cannot think of any features that are needed at this time.

This solution works. The only issues are hardware failures.

With respect to the scalability, I have it running in five-person offices and in fifty-person offices.

The technical support was very good originally but fell short when GFI took over. It is now getting better.

I switched from SonicWall because, at the time, they did not accurately report the throughput of the router when all of the UTM features were enabled. Also, setting up the traffic rules was not as easy as Kerio Control.

The initial setup for this solution is very easy.

The implementation and deployment is something that I do myself.

I do not worry about the ROI. I just need something that works and protects.

My advice is to use your own hardware and do not use theirs.

We resell Kerio Control to other businesses. We use the virtual appliance model. The device is used for direct management.

Kerio Control protects our email servers. The product provides a pre-filter to scan the email messages before they get to the email servers.

All of the features of Kerio Control are equally good. The most valuable to us are the firewall rules, the intrusion detection system, and IP address features.

Kerio Control has just improved on their biggest problem, which was to introduce better support for high-availability requirements in production.

Kerio Control is very stable.

The scalability of Kerio Control is limited, but they also market it as such. It's not an enterprise-class product, but they don't claim that it is. 

Kerio Control is for small enterprise businesses with various clients. It can support an organization of up to 300 general users, remote developers, and trained workers.

For deployment and maintenance, Kerio Control requires just one person. I tend to increase my usage of the product as time goes by, as well as the number of support clients.

I have never had to use Kerio's customer support services.

I did use other solutions previously. I switched because they suddenly made the Kerio Control license end-of-life.

The setup of Kerio Control is very straightforward. The initial implementation is about three hours, with various points of review. We are a managed service provider, so there are ongoing reviews and adjustments for the clients.

ROI is difficult when you've got a "not for resale" version of Kerio Control. It's a total cost of ownership and further investment. The product is brilliant. I don't know how much value you can add on to it, but the cost point of the Kerio is much lower than the bigger vendors.

The version of Kerio Control that I use is a "not for resale" unit. I get the product for free. There is an additional cost for the annual software licensing which depends on which model you have and the number of users.

The Kerio Control license has a varying cost, but generally, it's around £300 a year.

I would rate Kerio Control a ten out of ten points overall.

Our primary use case for this solution is to provide our customers with a reliable and secure internet service for which they can perform bandwidth management and other operations.

This is a service that we set up for the yacht owners. They all want to carry the control over the yacht.

The most valuable feature is to provide users with the ability to log in to the portal page, keep track of their data usage and perform bandwidth management. It allows the captain to keep a log of everything that is happening and see who is using what bandwidth.

If somebody is using too much bandwidth then they have the option to throttle them back.

As of late, it seems that they can't release a version that doesn't have some type of bug. It crashes when it runs out of memory, and fixing this would be great.

I would like to be able to inspect https packets for the purpose of virus scanning.

This solution has been pretty stable overall. That said, there is room for improvement.

For some clients, some of the options cause problems. Filtering, for example, is something that one client does not need at all. Turning this off seems to straighten things out.

I have been awoken at 3 am by emails telling me that things are down, and that has happened within the past couple of updates, but not as much. I keep my eyes on the Kerio forums and watch for other people who say that it is time to upgrade again.

My impression is that it is pretty scalable and it can handle a lot of stuff.

I don't use it to the point where I'm linking multiple sites together, so I can't comment on that aspect.

We have the solution installed on approximately twenty boats now, and we're continuing to install them.

The technical support used to be great. However, it's gone way downhill. I used to speak directly to the person writing the code, and he would walk you through when you need help. Now, I can barely get a hold of him.

Thankfully, now that I know the software inside and out, I don't really need them.

I have used a couple of other solutions.

For me, they are straightforward. However, the reason we chose this solution is because it has to be something that the captain can understand. It has to be a straightforward user interface. 

If it were a situation where a client were going to be managing every aspect of it and the captain is not going to be involved, I would probably choose pfSense or something else.

This initial setup is straightforward. It is a no brainer, and anybody can get in there and just do it. They deployment takes maybe half an hour, if that.

It all depends on what they are requesting. It's not just "one size fits all". Some boats have a LAN they need set up, while some boats don't. We set up the unit sources and assign different ports.

These days they have a dedicated internet port, and they've got four or five land ports. We'll take one or two of the land ports and assign them to the Internet port, so that way they'll have a ship-to-shore connection, as well as a VSAT (Very small aperture terminal) connection. We'll also have another device with a cell router coming into the third connection, so that way they can switch between the three Internet connections when they need to.

For example, if they are out at sea they're going to use the VSAT, but if they are in the port then they will either use the ship-to-shore Wi-Fi, or the cellular connection, to save money.

We have eight technicians on site, but it only takes one person to handle the deployment. The maintenance is quick; we can log in remotely and update it if we need to. I prefer to be on site for this in case something goes wrong, but nine times out of ten everything is just fine.

We do the implementation ourselves.

There is a yearly upkeep fee.

We have evaluated WatchGuard and pfSense as well. We basically need something that is easy for the client because they want to have control over everything, and that's what Kerio is going to give them.

This solution is big in our industry because the captains have to have control over everything. If the captain wants to log in and see what his users, his crew members are doing, then Kerio provides that.

I suggest watching the Kerio forums for what the community is saying in terms of upgrades and support.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.