We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall and Sophos Cyberoam UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very easy to understand. It's not overly complex."
"The solution has very good threat and content filtering switches."
"The ease of setting the solution up is a valuable aspect for us."
"This version is stable. I don't have any issues with this solution, in our environment, it works well."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"Fortigate is very scalable to serve our customers' needs. We have scaled already from fifty to more than a hundred instances of Fortinet FortiGate. Around 20 staff are required for deployment and maintenance, mostly engineers."
"The stability of the solution is very good. We can see that it gets even better with every release."
"The most beneficial aspect of the Cisco Secure Firewall is the AnyConnect component within the firewall package, which we selected specifically for VPN usage due to its exceptional integration with various third-party devices and applications."
"The GUI is among the most valuable features,"
"Cisco offers a great educational series to train users on their devices."
"Logging is great. It will show when it reaches its capacity before it is too late, unless you have bursts of traffic."
"Beats sophisticated cyber attacks with a superior security appliance."
"The product offers good scalability."
"If configured, Firepower provides us with application visibility and control."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Web application filtering eases internet access control."
"The product is easy to maintain."
"SD-WAN and IPSec features are valuable to me."
"The most valuable feature is the solution is easy to configure for users."
"The solution works perfectly without any users."
"The tool's robust features allow for the customization of policies, objects, and firewall settings."
"The user interface is well laid out and understandable."
"We would like to see an upgrade to the VPN feature, we are using the VPN from outside of our office and there is a limitation to 10 connections, more connections would be suitable."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"At first glance, the interface for the device is very confusing."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"I would like to have logs, monitoring, and reporting for a month without extra fees."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"We are Cisco partners, and when we recommend Cisco FirePower to customers, they always think that FirePower is bad. For a single installation of FirePower, if I have to write about 18 tickets to Cisco, it's a big problem. There was an issue was related to Azure. We had Active Directory in Azure. The clients had to connect to FirePower through Azure. We had a lot of group policies. After two group policies, we had to make groups in Azure, and they had to sign in and sign back. It was a triple-layer authentication, and there was a big problem, so we didn't use it."
"HTTPs inspection and higher throughput/spec would be good."
"We don't have any serious problems. The firewall models that we have are quite legacy, and they have slower performance. We are currently investigating the possibility of migrating to next-generation firewalls."
"It has poor performance."
"Setting firewall network rules should be more straightforward with a clearer graphical representation. The rule-setting method seems old-fashioned. The firewall and network rules are separate from the Firepower and web access rules."
"We would like to be able to manage a set of firewalls rather than individual firewalls. We haven't really looked into it or yet implemented it, but a single pane of glass would be helpful. We also use another vendor's firewalls, and they have a centralized management infrastructure that we have implemented, which makes it a little bit easier when you're managing lots of firewalls."
"It could also use a reporting dashboard."
"Firewalls, in general, were not really designed for normal IT personnel, but for firewall and network experts. Therefore, they missed a lot of options and did not provide any good reporting or improvement options."
"The VPN needs to be improved."
"Sometimes, users are timed out intermittently."
"The data support response time should be improved."
"The solution's pricing could be a problem for some small businesses."
"SD-WAN should be included in the tool."
"It should have a better VPN client. We decided to find something different than Cyberoam because of the VPN client software. It would be nice to have a user interface not only in English but also in different languages."
"The following could be improved: Web Filtering using wildcards; clarity regarding the firewall rules; granular reporting features."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM could improve by adding VPN site-to-site capabilities. The correct version does not work with Microsoft Azure Cloud."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos UTM, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Untangle NG Firewall and Sophos XG. See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.
