SonicWall NSa Reviews

The solution is deployed on-premises. We're using the latest version. 

There are around 3,000 users of this solution in my company.

I like this solution because we are focused on VPN and have many brands that need to link a VPN and have security, like ransomware, spyware, and basic protection.

The cost could be lower. There could also be more flexibility for smaller companies. The cost to maintain SonicWall is quite high.

After updating the firmware, sometimes the solution stops working. I had to do a factory reset and reconfiguration to solve the problem. 

I have used this solution for about two years.

The solution is stable. I would rate the stability as seven out of ten. 

Technical support isn't bad, but it isn't the best. Sometimes, we don't receive the answers we're looking for, so we have to look it up on the internet. 

I would rate technical support as three out of five.

Setup isn't difficult, but it's not easy either. It depends on the experience of the person who is implementing the solution.

We use four people for maintenance. There's also a support team of three people.

SonicWall's technical support helped us with implementation.

We paid about 10,000 in our currency for one packet of SonicWall NSa.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.

We use this solution for the VPN and to give permissions for on-premises access.

We're using the latest update.

The solution is deployed on-premises. There are two people using this solution in my organization.

SD-WAN is a good feature.

We also use the Sophos Firewall for web configuration, which we don't have in SonicWall. Only Sophos has those options. If SonicWall included that feature, that would be a benefit for us.

We have configured radius configuration. I would like to see an in-built authentication feature that would authenticate results and directly communicate to the cloud. Right now, we have a third party server for that. We are manually configuring it.

If anything goes wrong, sometimes we are unable to bring up that MPS configuration immediately. Our main VPN connection is always authenticated with the MFA option itself. When that happens, we have to revert those changes back as LDAP authentication. That isn't a good recommendation for our organization for VPN purposes. Anybody can connect directly, so they won't get two-factor authentication. It would be great for us if that was an in-built feature included in the Azure authentication.

I have used this solution for more than six years.

It's straightforward. There wasn't any kind of complexity. Deployment took one hour.

I would rate the setup as 4.5 out of 5.

We do the maintenance ourselves. Whenever there's any kind of patch release or upgrade release, we do the maintenance from our side. We have a dedicated team for maintenance.

Deployment was done in-house, but we did take some help from SonicWall.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

I would recommend that product. If those small features were included, it would be a good, all-in-one product.

Our primary use case for SonicWall NSa is a firewall and for analytics. I use SonicWall NSa to follow the users. Some users manage to bypass the firewall sometimes and install certain software. I track all of this "bad" behavior and block it.

SonicWall NS has a lot of valuable features. One of the best SonicWall NSa features is the ability to collect mini routers and get only one user connection.

Overall, I'm satisfied with SonicWall NSa, but it would be better if they could add a small terminal to each device. This would help me deal with certain issues by running a small bot onto any PC. This terminal could control technical configuration from a centralized configuration with the SonicWall appliance. 

I have been using this solution since last February. However, I have worked with SonicWall since 2007.

We have about 150 users. Each employee configures up to three connections: one on a PC and one or two on mobiles.

We are happy with SonicWall NSa's tech support. We have an account manager and whenever I run into any issues, I email him directly and he calls me within the hour. This is sufficiently fast for our needs. 

We previously ran MicroTech and FortiGate. We switched because we wanted to try something new. We change the technology we use each year.

The initial setup is easy for me because I am a specialist. I previously worked for a Dell and SonicWall partner before, so I'd configured SonicWall NSa many times before. However, now as a customer, I had a SonicWall consultant deploy it.  

We used a SonicWall NSa consultant for the deployment. 

I can't speak to any ROI we've had in terms of numbers but all technology of this type will give you a return on investment because it's secure and makes your business run smoothly.

For example, as I am in the desert and there is no fiber connection here, I was using SIM cards that gave me seven GB a day. Before we deployed SonicWall NSa, I was running seven SIM cards for a total of about 50 GB per day. Right now, I use only one seven-GB SIM card.

The solution is a security system we install in our customer's office. It's a firewall. We have a control panel to manage and view some data and this control panel is in the cloud. However, the firewalls themselves are in the customer's office.

The security is great.

It has great performance.

The prices are similar to other vendors and the support is good.

The deployment process is simple. 

I can't speak to any missing features. They've recently released a new version and it's quite good. Right now, it's the best solution.

I'd like to see integration with Microsoft 365 for authentication.

We've been using the solution for a while. We've definitely used it over the past year.

The stability and performance are great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. It's true that SonicWall had a lot of problems in the past, however, now it's very stable. It works perfectly.

It's very scalable. In some cases, it's necessary to change the firewall, however, it's easy to change as SonicWall has the ability to migrate the configuration from all firewalls to the new one.

Technical support is great. They are helpful and responsive. We are quite happy with their capabilities.

I'm also familiar with Fortinet. I find SonicWall more secure. It also offers better performance. 

Previously, we installed a firewall directly with Linux and we configured it all at once. It was very manual. 

Now, the implementation is easy. In the past it was difficult. Companies needed a specialist to deploy new firewalls. Now, they have a system that a normal technician can install.

It takes a few hours to install and deploy the product.

We have two people that handle deployment and maintenance. 

The pricing is on par with others on the market. It's not overly expensive.

The cheaper option is between €100 and €200. However, NSa has different models and the more expensive one is for around €10,000, more or less.

When we purchase our NSa, we buy the firewall and the security services. The security services are for a period of time from one year to three years. When we arrive at the end of the contract we need to renew the security services, however, the firewall will still work. We only need to renew the security services.

When we decide to change from Linux firewalls to an appliance we looked at different companies, like Cisco and Fortinet, and we compared these different companies and products. We decided on SonicWall due to the relationship between performance and security.

We are partners.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

The solution is used basically a parameter firewall and to secure the company network.

The content filtering is very good.

The solution is easy to use.

They offer good antivirus solutions. It's basically a complete package.

The solution is stable. 

There's always room for improvement. 

For example, the monitoring system is in need of improvement. Their monitoring system is too expensive. Most of the company doesn't apply the monitoring system as it's too expensive. Some more monitoring features should be built into the firewall device itself.

Management spends a lot of money on the device, and they want to know what is working, et cetera. To understand this, we need some reports, graphs, and figures. Without these items, management may not be convinced they are spending the money in the right way. Having reports that reflect the work done to keep the network secure would show the benefits and the ROI in a positive way that would help sell management on the product itself.

The ongoing service fees are high.

The solution could use more online educational tools to help users understand the underlying functionality of the product. Things like videos and tutorials could help a lot. 

I've been working with the solution for the last nine years or so at this point. It's been almost a decade.

The solution is very stable. We can do 80% to 90% of tasks with no issues whatsoever. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution can scale, however, in Pakistan, it's not easy not to spend so much. One device can last over five to six years. You can say scale, however, you need to have an understanding of what functionality you will need over the years. Over four to six years, the device can fulfill your requirements. After six to seven years, you can replace it with another model or another brand to meet your updated needs.

I didn't use support over the last nine years, except for handling the device replacement itself. I needed a device replacement due to some damage, and they fulfilled my request and requirements. In terms of tasks such as configuration issues, I've never actually asked for assistance for those queries and therefore could not rate how helpful or responsive they are when they cover those matters. 

In the past, I have also used Fortinet and FortiGate as well as Juniper. I have 19 years of experience with various solutions. I have used multiple devices including Cisco, Juniper, FortiGate, SonicWall, and others. Basically, FortiGate and SonicWall are more or less the same types of solution. However, the SonicWall is easier to install than FortiGate.

I have deployed the solution myself. I did not need the help of an integrator or consultant.

The pricing is reasonable, however, all firewalls have high prices for subscriptions for their services to cover after warranty needs for content filtering, for antiviruses, for web filtering, et cetera. All firewalls have extra prices. 

After spending so much money year over year, we were surprised that we had to still pay more than the device cost just to covers services. That's why you may find that most companies stop their services and just running the firewall as a box. Most small companies stop their services just due to the high subscription fees. That said, multinationals or larger organizations likely still pay the service fees.

In places like Pakistan, a developing country, it's hard to continuously pay, as we find the continuing service fees expensive. They should work to make an exception for certain regions such as ours.

I'm a customer and an end-user.

I can't remember the exact versions we are using. We may be on version 6, and the models I have used include the 2600, 2500, and 3600 series.

I'd warn new users that the box is huge. The box has multiple functionalities and most users are not trained. They can't benefit from all the functionality as they don't know that it exists. Due to the lack of knowledge, most users don't leverage additional functionalities which they should. While the solution offers good devices and reasonable pricing for the box, companies need to educate themselves on how they can best use the product to their advantage. SonicWall can help by posting more videos and sharing more information.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The tool is easy to manage with a friendly GUI.

SonicWall provides endpoint security with advanced protection. Moreover, SonicWall includes access points and additional features.

The product could expand its throughput capacity.

I have been using SonicWall NSa as a reseller for 19 years.

The SonicWall NSa is considered a high-end midrange firewall suitable for integrating small businesses and main offices. The range of NSa models can accommodate from as few as 250 users with the smallest model to 1,400 users with the NSa 6700 model.

All those features are the same, but NSa SonicWall is cheaper than other solutions. It has a Secure Upgrade Plus offering, with options for either one plus one or two plus one.

The initial setup is fair and quick. Deploying a certain firewall takes three or four hours, depending on the client's requirements.

We are also selling SonicWall products. We have a dedicated team that handles the deployment process. As a pre-sales engineer, I conduct presentations on the NSa and facilitate client discussions.

SonicWall is free for the first year and chargeable for the second year if you opt for two years.

The NSa is a model of SonicWall firewall. It encompasses firewall, content filtering, DNS filtering, antivirus scanning, and primary and advanced firewall requirements.

It helps with threat prevention up to the memory level.

I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution nine out of ten.

My primary use case is web filtering, VPN, and sometimes UTM. I can check a VPN for point-to-point connectivity with this solution.

The features I found most valuable are email security and web filtering.

The features I would like to see improve are the dashboard and the UI.

In the next release, I'd like to see APIs included.

I have been working with SonicWall for approximately two to three years.

I would rate the stability of this solution a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would say the initial setup was easy. I'd rate it an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

When deploying, you first use a gateway, ISP terminated in the firewall, and then terminate to the user end. Usually, deployment takes two to three years.

The deployment was done by one or two engineers.

I have experience with Fortinet and I would say this solution is much better suited for SMB customers, while SonicWall is better for large enterprises.

I would recommend this solution to enterprise customers.

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.

We use the product for a lot of things, so it's hard to talk about an individual use case.

The solution seems to help with any intrusion.

I like all the features. The global filtering and the content filtering are great. It's not always intuitive, however, you can usually figure it out. It's really handling all of our firewall needs.

It's stable.

The solution can scale. 

The user interface could be better. 

I've been at the company for about two years and have used the solution since my arrival.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. As long as we maintain patching, we're good.

The solution has been scalable.

About 150 people are using it in our organization. 

I'm not sure if we have plans to increase usage at this time. 

We have been very satisfied with the technical support. 

Positive

I did not previously use a different solution. this product was in place when I arrived at the company. 

The product was already set up when I got here, so I can't speak to the implementation process.

You only need one person to handle deployment and maintenance tasks. 

We've had it for quite a while and therefore must find it to be quite cost-effective. 

I'm not familiar with the licensing aspects of the solution. 

I'm a technical person. I don't care about the cost.

We have a very old SonicWall NSa. That's why we're looking to upgrade.

I'd advise new users to just learn how to work around the interface. That's my one complaint. It's sometimes a little cumbersome to use the UI.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.