SonicWall NSa Reviews

Our use case is for firewall security. The solution is deployed on-premises.

It's an all-in-one solution. We can do the hosting and security all under one box. The UTM is a good feature.

The dynamics needs to be improved. The solution is not very compatible compared to the market products.

The solution is stable. We need only one or two people for maintenance.

It is scalable. We have around 100 users, and we have plans to increase usage.

Technical support is good.

Initial setup was easy. We mostly did the installation ourselves. One person is enough to complete the installation. Depending on the network, it only takes a couple of minutes to do because it's so simple.

I would give this solution 10 out of 10. I would recommend it to others; it's a good solution.

We have two SonicWalls in the High Availability setup with failover configuration.

We use it for the firewalling, for IPS protection and for VPN clients.

With SonicWall we have more insight in the applications that users are using and what they are doing on the internet, so we can monitor better. It gives us better monitoring.

We now have more insight and information; what protocols and what websites users are trying to reach and what is blocked and what is not blocked, so we can better follow the tracks of the users.

The features that I have found most valuable are the firewalling, which is very good and the GUI which is very intuitive. It is easy to use and provides great security.

Overall, I'm quite happy about the product. The configuration and the interface are very good. Maybe the pricing and licensing could be improved.

It is not scalable. If your enterprise is growing hard then you have to buy another, bigger product. Maybe if you use it virtually it is more scalable.

We have been using SonicWall NSa for maybe eight to 10 years.

I work for several companies, and we use the NSa with one of them.

It is very stable.

Scalability is an issue. If you need to scale for more performance you will need another product in a higher range. You cannot scale the product itself. That's not possible.

It is not scalable at all.

We have about 350 users. I do the maintenance on my own.

We use it daily.

We do not have plans to increase at the moment.

Their technical support is very good.

The initial setup is not complex, it is very easy.

In terms of my implementation strategy - at first I write down the case we need. I investigate all the uses we have to implement with the SonicWall, and then I install and configurate it. I think the primary configuration was maybe three or four hours.

It was all done by myself.

You can buy the license for one or three years, and we mostly choose the three year. That's a little bit cheaper.

We looked at the Cisco and we looked at the Palo Alto, but the SonicWall was the most valuable for the pricing, the best product for us. The main difference is the pricing.

SonicWall NSa is a very good product with a very nice price, and it is low-level to use.

It is easy to manage and easy to implement.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give SonicWall NSa a nine because of the stability and the easy-to-use GUI. It's a very nice product.

This solution is used as an IPsec tunnel and DDT.

SonicWall NSa has user-friendly firmware.

In terms of improvement, features like App Control do not work properly.

I have been using SonicWall NSa for eight years.

SonicWall NSa is stable.

It is scalable.

SonicWall NSa has excellent support.

I would recommend SonicWall to anyone.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Used as our Firewall and internet Gateway in our head office and branch office with site to site VPN configured

Improved our corporate security. we have bandwidth management configured, enable app control

I like the solution's configuration, interfaces, and user guides.

I would like to see better integration, the easy of bandwidth monitoring.

We've been using SonicWall NSa for six years.

The solution is stable. We have not had any issues in this domain.

Good

I do have experience with technical support. The last time I interacted with them was fine. They handled and resolved my case. 

The only other solution I have used is Cisco, although not as extensively as SonicWall NSa. This makes it difficult for me to compare solutions. 

The solution is easy to install.

In-house

more than 85%

Cisco, FortiGate

I do recommend the solution, although I have not compared it with other ones. 

There are as many as 50 users making use of the solution in my network or gateways. 

I rate SonicWall NSa as a nine out of ten. 

We use SonicWall NSA for IDS, IPS, Intrusion detection, and intrusion protection.

The most valuable features of this solution are intrusion detection, intrusion prevention, and the advanced capture client, which provides live traffic analysis.

Currently, the only issue that has been experienced is with expansion.

The model that we are using cannot expand very well, and the firewall is not able to handle all of them.

They could add some more features.

The current version does not have a duo power interface. It only has a single power interface, which has limitations in terms of high availability. Duo Power is a good feature to have.

The interface is an area that can be improved.

We acquired it in 2017. We have been using SonicWall NSA for four years.

We are using NSA 6600.

SonicWall NSA has been very reliable, mainly because of the ATP Capture Client and the IDS and IPS.

The scalability of SonicWall NSA is good.

We have regular contact with technical support.

When we send a support ticket, they respond to us within the day and resolve the issue.

They have a good response time.

We purchase the license on a yearly basis. 

They do have the option to purchase yearly, or two years, and three years of renewal. 

I believe the pricing is reasonable. There are some competitors that offer more features but are more expensive. 

For organizations and small businesses should choose SonicWall.

I would recommend the solution to others who are at an enterprise level.

With the features that are offered such as IDS, IPS, and ATP Capture Client, SonicWall is a bit higher than the average firewall.

I would rate SonicWall NSA an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for security. It's used as a firewall.

The solution is very stable.

It's an excellent product for an SMB.

The filtering is excellent.

The solution is quite stable.

We found the initial setup to be straightforward.

You can scale the solution to a certain extent.

The product likely isn't a good fit for a large organization.

They need to elaborate on their business from a technical point of view. 

I've been working with the solution for about four or more years at this point. It's been a while. 

The product scales quite well. There are no bugs. It's not glitchy. It doesn't crash or freeze. I find it to be reliable. 

You can scale the solution. We haven't used it beyond 1,000 to 1,500 users. Beyond that, I'm not sure what it can handle. I haven't really tried to scale it too much.

I've also used Palo Alto. I used it at my previous organization.

We found the initial setup to be very straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. A company should have any problem with the process.

We're a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with SonicWall.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. While we've been mostly happy with it, it's more for SMBs as opposed to larger organizations.

I'd recommend the product to small organizations for sure.

At the organization I used to work for, this solution was used as the primary perimeter firewall. We had 11 sites. Each site had a firewall that sat behind a router and did all the filtering.

The security features we pretty good. The antivirus and items of that nature were quite helpful to have.

The web sourcing was very good. 

The stability was very good.

We found the installation to be pretty straightforward.

Sometimes I found the GUI and some of the features a little bit hard to navigate, as opposed to Fortigate, which is much more user-friendly. 

What Fortigate has which SonicWall doesn't, is the per rule natting. SonicWall only does the central mapping. If they could include something like per rule natting it would be better.

I've used the solution for about three years or so.

The solution was very stable. There were no bugs or glitches. It didn't crash or freeze. It was reliable. There were no breaches.

The solution was quite scalable. If a company needed to expand it, it could do so.

We had 300 or so users at our organization using the product.

I do not work for the company anymore. I can't speak to their plans for the solution and if they plan to increase usage or not. 

I had experience with support in the past and I found them to be helpful and responsive. I was very pleased with their level of assistance.

I'm currently using Fortigate now. I switched companies and this company uses Fortigate.

The installation process isn't too difficult. It's pretty easy and rather straightforward. A company shouldn't have any trouble with the initial setup.

The time it takes to deploy depends on the company, however, I recall it only took about an hour or so at our organization. Physically, you might need help with the actual setup, however, for the most part, a person could handle it alone.

I was able to handle the process myself. I did not need the assistance of a consultant or integrator. 

Our organization would pay for a license every two to three years.

I was a customer and an end-user. I never had a professional relationship with SonicWall.

I would recommend the product to other organizations.

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

We are integrators, but for SonicWall, we use it for a specific project in industrial cybersecurity. It was for ransomware recovery and network restoration.

We did the firewall and the configuration for the ransomware prevention.

Our clients were using it to control the SCADA System in their industry.

The most valuable features of this solution are the GUI pre-filtering and the ATP (advanced threat protection). Also, the ATP packet capture is helpful. We used these features during our restoration.

The content ID needs to be improved. If I compare it with Palo Alto, there are more features in Palo Alto that are not included in SonicWall. For example, PDoS is not available in the current version, that I could find.

They do have DLP and Host protection, but not PDoS.

Also, the IPS and the UTM need to be improved.

I haven't found anything regarding the IoT security in the device security on SonicWall.

I have been working with SonicWall for one year.

We are working with NSA 3600, which is the latest version.

We have no complaints about the model.

The scalability level is medium. They are okay with the model, the throughput, and the traffic rate.

We did not require technical support.

Currently, we are running Palo Alto, Check Point, and SonicWall.

Two or three months ago, we were working with Fortinet FortiGate. We have also used Vyatta.

This solution was not implemented properly.

The AV enforcement feature in SonicWall is limited to only one vendor for antivirus, which is Kaspersky. It's the only antivirus solution that we can enforce through the firewall.

Other vendors provide you with multiple options such as Sophos, Kaspersky, Trend Micro, and Bitdefender.

I would rate SonicWall NSA a six out of ten.