We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Sophos Cyberoam UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The SD-WAN is the most valuable feature."
"Offers good security and filtering."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the rules and quality of service."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"The security features that they have are quite good. On top of that, their licensing model is quite nice where they don't charge you anything for the SD-WAN functionality for the firewall."
"The interface is very user-friendly and I like it very much."
"One of the valuable features is a standardized OS."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"The visibility is most valuable. It allows us to see all of our devices from one place, and it gives us the ability to manage push updates and things like that from one place."
"Any kind of cloud environment anywhere can be protected through this effortlessly."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring. We can easily monitor what kind of stuff comes over to our network and we can then check the dashboard and work accordingly."
"The solution has been quite stable."
"Monitoring using SmartConsole and all its features is extremely easy, and I find SmartEvent an excellent monitoring tool for spotting threats and user behaviour."
"It is dynamic and agile, and its features and utilities continuously improve and evolve."
"Check Point has pretty simple solutions, like the virtual appliance which you just download and it is imported into VMware and you just start using it."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its scalability. You will only have to pay less for scaling up. Its notable benefit is deployment complexity. Regional deployment is simpler compared to on-premise setup."
"We consider the user level and control features of Sophos Cyberoam UTM to be the best."
"The solution's web filtering is an important feature for us in our company."
"The most valuable feature is the IPSec forwarding."
"Having a firewall solution with a data quota is very important when the bandwidth is limited, which really distinguishes it from other products."
"The solution is easy to integrate."
"The reporting features are very good."
"There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN."
"The firewall feature has different branches, such as extended firewalls."
"There aren't really any negative aspects to discuss."
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"FortiGate should have a better way of detecting and managing the system memory because otherwise if the memory is too low, a system restart is required."
"It should have a better pricing plan. It is too expensive. It should also have a more granular view of the attack. I don't have FortiAnalyzer, and it is difficult for me to have a complete view when there is an attack on my server."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"The search tool needs improvement. It's very difficult to search for policies right now."
"The support we receive when we need to upgrade is not satisfactory and has room for improvement."
"Fortinet FortiGate should improve the VPN tokens."
"Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware."
"Sometimes, if you aren't familiar with the solution, it can be a bit complex, but it does become easier to use with time. However, every time they launch a new version, it becomes more complex and you need to take time to get familiar with all the changes. For every version that they upgrade, you need to upskill yourself."
"The challenge mainly revolves around the slower functionality of virtual IP switching in Azure Virtual Network compared to on-premise solutions. On-premise, switching between clusters is faster, taking only a few seconds, while in Azure, it can extend up to five minutes. The downtime is a concern for us."
"The solution lacks the capability to scale effectively."
"This application can be more integrated with web application firewalls. Better integrations would provide more granularity, which would be helpful for focusing on the application itself and preventing attacks. It would be good to include the cross-domain search. If you have multiple firewalls that are managed on the same platform and you want to check who is using some particular objects or where a specific ID is being used, it should provide an option for this kind of search instead of having to check one by one on each firewall."
"The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"The biggest room for improvement is that, for a long time now, they've moved everything over to R80 but they still maintain some of the stuff in the old dashboard. They need to "buy in" and move everything to the modern dashboard so that you don't have to go to one place and to another place, at times, to configure the environment. It's time they just finish what they started and put everything in the new, modern dashboard."
"I would like to see more focus on east-west traffic inspection and AWS."
"Maybe network traffic analysis for malware and malicious behavior."
"The blocking needs to be improved."
"Network visibility is an area in the solution with shortcomings where improvements can be made."
"The documentation is not straightforward."
"I would say there's room for improvement in terms of the GUI. Because it is better than some of the other standard firewalls. They have the drag and drop features."
"The following could be improved: Web Filtering using wildcards; clarity regarding the firewall rules; granular reporting features."
"SD-WAN should be included in the tool."
"Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 117 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos UTM, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Untangle NG Firewall. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM report.
See our list of best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.