Positive

My main use case for OpenVPN Access Server is to allow our employees to access the private network and external web services that are whitelisted to our network.

A specific example of how my team uses OpenVPN Access Server is that developers are accessing private development services, microservices, or resources on AWS, while the business team or sales has access to some specific services launched and implemented on our private network that are closed from internet access.

External parties or partners whitelist our IP addresses, and our employees use VPN to access those services as well.

I believe the best features OpenVPN Access Server offers are 2FA authorization and its connection with Google Workspace, which allows for good synchronization.

I use the 2FA authentication and Google Workspace synchronization, and the benefits of these features for my team are that Google accounts of our employees can be synchronized and authorized through SSO, which makes it easier to set up and configure VPN for our employees. If they have a Google account, they can connect to VPN easily. 2FA adds an additional layer of authorization that enhances security.

OpenVPN Access Server has positively impacted my organization by allowing access to our private services, enhancing security, and enabling remote work from anywhere, as I just need to connect to the VPN to have encrypted traffic to our private resources.

I think the most difficult part of OpenVPN Access Server that I would improve is the management of the network, particularly the configuration on the admin side of the network and subnets, which is quite complicated.

Some services, such as YouTube, occasionally become unavailable because it seems to be a bot detection issue from YouTube related to the VPN, and I believe that can be improved to ensure other services do not misidentify OpenVPN Access Server as a bot.

I would describe the user interface of OpenVPN Access Server as fine, but sometimes it requires reloading the whole page to see changes, which can be annoying. In cluster mode, I cannot see what node the user is connected to from the cluster without checking each node individually, which could be improved.

I have been working in my current field for seven years.

OpenVPN Access Server is stable.

OpenVPN Access Server's scalability is somewhat hard to manage, but it remains scalable overall, primarily due to its cluster mode.

We did not use a previous solution; however, I could mention WireGuard, which could have been an option but lacked 2FA authorization and Google authorization and operates only on Layer 3, while OpenVPN Access Server works on Layer 7, which is important for business users.

I find it easy to install OpenVPN Access Server, and there are no issues. It is just a couple of clicks or using the package from the Ubuntu package registry, and the documentation is clear on how to do that.

I did not purchase OpenVPN Access Server through the AWS Marketplace; it was set up manually as a self-hosted solution.

I have not seen a return on investment in terms of fewer employees needed, money saved, or time saved.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for OpenVPN Access Server is that the license was for 10 people and it was fine on a yearly basis.

WireGuard was another option considered before choosing OpenVPN Access Server.

OpenVPN Access Server remains stable and works well despite a couple of things that can be improved or enhanced, and the documentation is good with no issues on that side. My impression of the connection speed when using OpenVPN Access Server compared to other VPN solutions is that it is medium; it is not fast and it is not slow, but in some cases, it could be slow.

My advice for others looking into using OpenVPN Access Server is to consider if they need a VPN or just zero trust network access. If they want to route traffic to specific domains, OpenVPN Access Server may not be suitable, but for a secure, safe, and stable VPN with good service integrations such as Google for SAML authorization, it works well and I would recommend it. I would rate OpenVPN Access Server an eight on a scale of one to ten.

My primary use case for OpenVPN Access Server is providing secure, centralized access to hybrid cloud environments. Whenever I set up hybrid cloud infrastructure for clients, deploying Access Server is a natural next step. It acts as a gateway, allowing us to securely connect to the private network for routine administration, system updates, and accessing internal dashboards and tools.

The main benefit I have seen from using OpenVPN Access Server is secure access to private resources over the public internet. That is the key benefit whenever it is set up, and it applies to all types of users. It applies to technical users who want to administer servers, internal users who are working, and executives who want to view internal dashboards. OpenVPN Access Server allows users to feel secure, and indeed, a lot of their traffic is secure. At the same time, if you configure OpenVPN Access Server correctly, users can continue to access non-corporate websites over the public internet, which is beneficial. If they are using Facebook or other personal activities on their phone, they can continue to do that, and that traffic will not be transferred over OpenVPN Access Server. Only when they try to access internal resources will that be accessed over OpenVPN Access Server. I really appreciate that aspect of OpenVPN Access Server.

The best features in OpenVPN Access Server for me are the integrations with single sign-on providers so that users can maintain a single corporate identity. I also appreciate the administration dashboard, which allows you to fairly easily provision subnets for different groups. Performance-wise, it is quite performant. OpenVPN Access Server supports both TCP and UDP protocols, and you can decide which to turn on or off. It is fairly performant and reliable. You can trust that once you are in the network, you will access your resources.

The user interface of OpenVPN Access Server is good but can be improved. I would prefer to see it become more intuitive. I use Twingate as an alternative, and in Twingate, you see resources, while in OpenVPN Access Server, those would be IP addresses. You get to see dashboards and access views of who can access a particular resource or subnet. You can see who can access what resources from the user view, but you can also see the reverse, which is which resource can be accessed by what users. That reverse view would be a nice addition to have in a dashboard. Additionally, access logs associated with that resource would be helpful, so it would be beneficial to have different views for the same content.

Beyond the positive aspects, I would like to see improvements in OpenVPN Access Server. Twingate offers a different approach to the same problem by moving more towards resource-specific resources and fine-grained zero-trust access, as opposed to entire subnets and entire networks. I would prefer to see views on resources. In the same way that we can define subnets, perhaps we could have views that describe what this particular subnet does and what this particular resource does. Then we can assign those resources and subnets to individual users and groups. It is more about granularizing the resources that can be accessed rather than simply bundling them under subnets or a list of subnets, which is the current approach.

Apart from that, I would like to see UI enhancements in OpenVPN Access Server in the future. Making it more modern would be beneficial.

I have been using OpenVPN Access Server for over eight years since 2018.

Regarding stability, I have not had any crashes, performance issues, or stability issues with OpenVPN Access Server. That is one thing I appreciate the most about OpenVPN Access Server. Once you set it up correctly, it works and continues to work reliably. I do not recall ever experiencing OpenVPN Access Server crashing or the OpenVPN Access Server client crashing personally.

Regarding scalability, I find OpenVPN Access Server scalable with some caveats. It is scalable on AWS because it is a matter of increasing the instance size and increasing the number of licenses. However, sometimes your license disappears or gets wiped out when you scale the infrastructure, which can be quite annoying, and requires reaching out to support to get set up again. Inherently it is scalable, but the process of scalability can be enhanced.

I would evaluate OpenVPN's technical support and customer service teams as providing standard support. You send a ticket or create a ticket, and somebody responds, and they seem to know what they are doing. The service is adequate. I would rate the technical support an eight on a scale of one to ten.

Positive

In comparison with other products and solutions such as Twingate or other VPN services, the key differences between OpenVPN Access Server and competitors include access to resources versus subnets, focusing on fine-grained access. Another difference is the ability to see logs specific to the resource that has been accessed. Compared to other products such as Cisco, the advantages include reliability and the protocol—OpenVPN Access Server uses HTTPS and UDP, which are universal. Some of the other protocols that other VPN providers use are not guaranteed. OpenVPN Access Server has advantages there. There should be a move more towards zero trust, where you are accessing a specific resource, defining a specific server or subnet, and assigning access to those resources to individual users or groups. That approach would be better.

The ease of installing and setting up OpenVPN Access Server within the organization depends on the skillset of the person conducting the setup. On AWS, I would say it is medium difficulty because you have to select the right license and the right instance size, and it is not inherently clear what instance size to use. On-premise, it is fairly easy to set up. The setup for clients depends on the client that the end user is using. On mobile devices, sometimes I find that Mac users and iPhone users find it easier to set up than Android users. Overall, I would characterize the setup difficulty as medium. It is not too difficult and also not too easy.

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing cost of OpenVPN Access Server is that the licensing is fair for the value provided. My experience is mostly on AWS, and there, I think the pricing is quite fair.

I utilize the Access Controls feature of OpenVPN Access Server by provisioning users into groups and then provisioning access to those groups. The effectiveness of OpenVPN Access Server in providing precise access to users, groups, or devices is quite effective and reliable. I would not say it is the most intuitive specifically because there are default access groups, then you have overrides, and it is not inherently clear for someone just getting started with the product. However, if you are more experienced, it is straightforward to set up. Once you set it up, it is reliable, and you have confidence that whatever access you provision for that group of users will be maintained.

I purchase OpenVPN Access Server for my clients through the AWS Marketplace. Given my extensive experience with OpenVPN Access Server, I would recommend that before any organization implements it, they really need to define what their networks and subnets are and what is connected to what. Consider whether your on-premise infrastructure is connected to your cloud and whether your cloud is connected to another cloud. It is essential to have a good understanding of your network. Make sure there are no overlapping subnets, and then decide where to provision OpenVPN Access Server. The key advice is to understand your network before you even provision this resource, because where you provision it will determine what users can access. You certainly want to have a good amount of coverage where possible so that you can access your internal resources securely. I would rate this product an eight overall.