"I like the firewall features, Snort, and the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS)."
"The integration of network and workload micro-segmentation helps a lot to provide unified segmentation policies across east-west and north-south traffic. One concrete example is with Cisco ACI for the data center. Not only are we doing what is called a service graph on the ACI to make sure that we can filter traffic east-west between two endpoints in the same network, but when we go north-south or east-west, we can then leverage what we have on the network with SGTs on Cisco ISE. Once you build your matrix, it is very easy to filter in and out on east-west or north-south traffic."
"Firepower has been used for quite a few enterprise clients. Most of our clients are Fortune 500 and Firepower is used to improve their end to end firewall functionality."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the integrations and IPS throughput."
"Provides good integrations and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"Being able to determine our active users vs inactive users has led us to increased productivity through visibility. Also, if an issue was happening with our throughput, then we wouldn't know without research. Now, notifications are more proactively happening."
"The Firepower+ISE+AMP for endpoint integration is something that really stands it out with other vendor solutions. They have something called pxGrid and i think it is already endorsed by IETF. This allows all devices on the network to communicate."
"OPNsense is easy to scale when running on the hardware."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"We have found pretty much all the features of the solution to be valuable."
"The system in general is quite flexible."
"The IDS and IPS features are valuable. From the usability perspective, there is a lot of good documentation. As IT professionals, we found it very easy to configure the firewall. It was easy to configure and use."
"I have found the solution has some great features overall, such as guest access capabilities, dashboards, and ease of use. There is plenty of documentation and support and it has the plugins that I needed."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"The most valuable features in OPNsense are reporting and visibility."
"The VPN is excellent on the solution."
"I find Sophos Cyberoam UTM very good. I like the feature of being able to block off Mac IDs that host users. For example, you have a Mac or Windows laptop and you created a hotspot. Other devices like mobiles and tablets e.g. iPads connected to that hotspot. We can block those devices that connected to the hotspot we created, only through Sophos. It's a good feature we didn't find in other UTMs."
"Its portal is user-friendly. I am able to manage the user data and access control through this device."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The performance has been good overall."
"The solution is easy to integrate."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It has been working fine. You just turn it on, and it works."
"It would be great if some of the load times were faster."
"The solution could offer better control that would allow the ability to restrictions certain features from a website."
"The central management tool is not comfortable to use. You need to have a specific skill set. This is an important improvement for management because I would like to log into Firepower, see the dashboard, and generate a real-time report, then I question my team."
"The performance should be improved."
"I believe that the current feature set of the device is very good and the only thing that Cisco should work on is improving the user experience with the device."
"The maturity needs to be better."
"I would like it to have faster deployment times. A typical deployment could take two to three minutes. Sometimes, it depends on the situation. It is better than it was in the past, but it could always use improvement."
"Cisco makes horrible UIs, so the interface is something that should be improved."
"The logging could improve in OPNsense."
"The interface isn't so friendly user. But we have some technicians here who are quite confident with this tool. OPNSense could maybe add sets of rules so it's simpler to manage different groups with particular needs."
"We did not like the fact that you have to configure everything with the graphic user interface. We have used other firewalls, such as FortiGate, that you can configure via code. OPNsense is not easy to integrate. When you are deploying via GitHub or another source repository, this is not possible. That's one thing we didn't like much."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is the Insight or the NetFlow analysis part. It would be good to have the possibility to dig down on the Insight platform. Right now, we can easily do only a few analyses. If this page becomes more powerful, it surely will be a well-adopted platform."
"There are issues with stability and reliability."
"The solution could be more secure."
"While they do have paid options that actually gives better features, for most of the clients, if they tend to take a paid option will instead opt for Fortinet."
"The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing."
"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 product is at its end-of-life. There is nothing to improve as it will be discontinued."
"It should have better VPN protection. Some of the VPN applications are not blocked by this firewall. Some VPNs are able to get through this firewall, which is why I am planning to replace this firewall with a good one in the near future."
"Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"The product had a hang issue. We needed to reboot, recreate the image, and reconfigure the previous image because the product hanged frequently."
"I had an issue when I was trying to stop a user from using too much bandwidth while I was using Azure, I was not able to stop them."
More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
OPNsense is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 9 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 6th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 22 reviews. OPNsense is rated 7.8, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Unbeatable pricing and easy to configure and use, but it can be configured only through the GUI, and the integration with Azure cloud is difficult". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Useful data quota features, but scalability is an issue and the signature database could be enhanced". OPNsense is most compared with pfSense, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos XG, Fortinet FortiGate and Sophos UTM, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, pfSense and WatchGuard Firebox. See our OPNsense vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM report.
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.
