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.

We are primarily using the solution to access the local networks. It allows colleagues who work from home to access the network.

It works well. The performance has been good. It's stable. 

It's been issue-free since we deployed it.

It helps ensure access for remote colleagues. You can gain access wherever you are. 

The connectivity is very good. 

It is scalable.

The setup is easy.

This solution is open-source. 

We'd like the solution to continue to improve security. We'd like security over the network lists related to OpenSense. 

I'd like to have more control over the users when they are accessing the network. I'd like to know everything they've done while they are on the network. 

I've been using the solution for three years. I've used it for a while now. 

The solution is stable and offers good connectivity. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. The performance has been good.

It is very scalable. We have 50 people on the solution. 

We do not have plans to increase usage at this time. 

We do not really need technical support assistance. 

We have used other solutions in the past. We did have Cisco AnyConnect and saw that OpenVPN was open-source and free, which is why we prefer it. 

The solution is very easy to set up. It is not a complex process. It's also very easy to configure. There are some tutorials to help you along. 

It took us about half a day to deploy the solution. 

We did the deployment three years ago, and since it was so long ago, I cannot recall the exact steps. 

We have about nine people that handle maintenance tasks as needed. There are managers, two developers, and network engineers that can handle the job.

We can handle the setup of the solution in-house. We did not need any outside help.

This is an open-source solution. 

I'm not sure if we are using the latest version of the solution. I'd recommend the solution to others.

This is a great solution for small businesses. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

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.

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. 

The solution is a VPN installed at the customer's headquarters, with three small offices connecting to the main server to open the application and access a specific database.

The most valuable feature is stability.

There is always room for more security features.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The solution is stable. I was able to apply almost the same configuration without having to monitor the connection daily. Thus, the solution is stable and does not require more bandwidth or a more complex configuration. It is simply a link to connect to the specific application on the server and that is all.

The scalability for the four locations is good.

The technical support was satisfactory as I found a lot of information on the network and on the Internet. 

The initial setup is straightforward, provided we have done our preparation. When we attempt to install the solution for the first time, we need to research how to configure it, check the parameters, assess whether other software is more suitable for the customer, and consider the cost.

The deployment took one week.

I first installed the server for the deployment, created the key for the client, and tested it on the external line to check if connecting was possible. Then, I went to different remote sites and deployed their information.

The solution was free of charge.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

We tested and discussed with the new vendor an application that is almost the same, but it is cloud-based and all upgrades are done on the data center. This means that their new solution does not require any installation on the remote side, just an internet connection to connect to the cloud and they don't have to worry about security as everything is stored on the server. This is the future.

We have ten people using the solution in our organization.

The number of people required for maintenance depends on the scale on which the solution is being used. On a small scale, only one person is required for maintenance.

There may be other solutions that are better than OpenVPN Access Server, but we must assess what we will receive after installation and our requirements in order to find the best solution to meet our needs.

When deploying the solution, we strive to work with it as much as possible. We must consider the possibility of updates and, if the customer has configured the solution, we must make the necessary adjustments. In this case, it is important to involve and attempt to comprehend the situation.

We primarily use the solution for a secure VPN connection.

Overall, it's okay and performance-wise it's fine.

It is easy to set up.

The solution is stable.

It can scale well. 

It is open-source and free to use. 

The performance could be a bit better. The stability could always be enhanced. 

When there are too many concurrent users trying to connect at the same time, there may be a bit of a bottleneck. When all people would like to reconnect to the VPN at the same time, the performance and availability of the solution could be better.

I've been using the solution for almost a year.

The solution is quite stable and has okay performance. However, it could be better. We'd like the performance to be more robust.

It's a scalable product. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

We have around 2,000 users on the solution right now. 

We're always open to increasing usage. 

I haven't dealt with technical support just yet. I can't speak to how helpful they would be. 

We did not previously use a different solution. 

With OpenVPN, the amount of people you need to deploy and maintain it depends on how many nodes you would need and the number of users as well as whether you are operating 24/7 or operating only during work hours. Likely, you would need between three and six people.

This is an open-source solution. We can use it for free. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

I would rate the product eight out of ten as I have been mostly pleased with its capabilities. 

In our country, there is a problem with accessing some sites. Therefore, we need to use OpenVPN. We also use it to access our server.

The solution is very easy to use. It's very direct. It always just works when we need it to. The performance is good. 

The solution is stable.

It can scale well.

The initial setup is fast and easy.

The interface could be a little bit better in future iterations. 

I can't remember how long I've used the solution. It's likely been around six years. 

The solution offers good performance. It is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It makes access simple. 

The product can scale well. 

We have 40 or 50 people using the product at this time. 

As remote work increases, we likely will expand usage. 

We haven't needed any additional support so far. 

We did not previously use any other services similar to this product. 

It is easy to set up. It just works right away. 

It takes a very short amount of time to deploy it. I found the process to be quite fast. We deployed in minutes, as I recall. 

A company would only need one person to handle the deployment process. 

We did not need any outside assistance or support for the implementation process. 

I'm unsure of the exact licensing costs. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

I'd recommend this product to other users and companies. 

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. 

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. 

We use the solution to communicate with our servers located in the office.

OpenVPN Access Server is a simple and easy-to-use solution that I can use myself without anybody's help.

The solution should provide a faster connection, and its security could be improved. The solution’s stability could be improved.

I have been using OpenVPN Access Server for two to three years.

I rate the solution a seven or eight out of ten for stability.

Around 50 users use the solution regularly in our organization.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight or nine out of ten.

The solution's initial setup is easy.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is complex and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a seven or eight out of ten.

The solution’s deployment did not take much time.

The solution was deployed on the cloud in our organization. More than 100 people are needed for the solution's deployment and maintenance.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.