SonicWall NSa Reviews

SonicWall suits our business, also cost-wise, and commercial-wise. It is in a feasible range for our organization.

We like the features, but the main thing is from a commercial and cost perspective it is very good.

The interface is user-friendly.

Vendor support needs improvement. The frequency of time and support should be increased.

From a vendor perspective, we were expecting more support.

When we experience a technical issue, it should be rectified immediately. We are facing a delay with response and resolution.

I have been using SonicWall NSA for approximately eight years.

SonicWall is stable.

This is a scalable solution.

We have approximately 2,000 users.

We are facing some issues with compatibility. We have moved to the latest version.

 Previously, we were using another version and the 5000 model of NSA.

It is fine. It is user-friendly.

It took a month and a half to deploy

We have a dedicated team here. They handle all of our deployment and troubleshooting.

We have a team of six to seven administrators to deploy and maintain this solution.

SonicWall is not an expensive solution.

I would recommend this version of SonicWall to others who are interested in implementing this solution. This latest version is quite fine.

I would rate SonicWall NSA an eight out of ten.

We are a solution provider and SonicWall NSA is one of the firewalls that we implement for our clients. I have implemented it for many companies and currently, I have four or five clients that we are supporting.

The most valuable features are the VPN, SSL VPN, and IPSec VPN.

The port forwarding functionality works well.

The number of concurrent VPN users is too limited.

SonicWall does not support DynDNS, yet this is an important feature for smaller companies that do not have a static IP address. It means that if the IP address changes then it would automatically be picked up by the firewall and it will assist with site-to-site VPN connections.

I have been working with SonicWall NSA for two years.

SonicWall NSA is a stable firewall.

I have set up SonicWall NSA for smaller companies in Dubai. Most of my customers are small to medium-sized with between 20 and 100 users. I would say that it is scalable.

The support offered by SonicWall is good. I would rate them a six or seven out of ten.

I also have more than five years of experience with Fortinet FortiGate. I have worked with models such as the 30E, 50E, 60E, 100E, and 60D. I also have experience with the Meraki Firewall.

The VPN limitations are better with FortiGate. Even with the lower versions, such as the 30E, it supports 100 tunnels and 100 users. With SonicWall, you are limited to five IPSec VPN connections at one time.

FortiGate also supports DynDNS, which is an important feature for smaller companies.

The initial setup is okay and I don't have any issues with it. When you configure any UTM box, whether it's new or if you are configuring it for the first time, it will take some time to complete. Once you get through it for the first time, it is much easier from then on.

If you want to connect more than five concurrent users by VPN then you have to pay an additional fee.

Overall, this is a good firewall and they would do much better in the market if they included support for DynDNS and additional VPN connections for free.

At this point, because of the restrictions with the VPN, we are recommending Fortinet rather than SonicWall. If in the future these concerns are dealt with, then I will recommend SonicWall.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used as a perimeter firewall for a gateway toward public internet traffic. Basically, it is a gateway between our internal network and public traffic.

Feature wise, the content filtering is good.

The basic firewall rules of the solution are great.

The product has a lot of bugs, actually. We are facing some issues with this product. The DPI SSL feature which is there, it is not working properly.

The IRL, when it was installed, had us facing some issues. However, as they kept on uploading the images, the issues are starting to get fixed. 

They already have this feature of advanced capture, set rotation, and so it is a next-generation firewall only. They could improve on their software side. Their software, which is managing the hardware, it's not up to the mark.

We've been using our current particular model (NSA 5600, the most current model) for the last two years. The other firewall we were using, SonicWall 5500 we've used for the last seven or eight years. 

It took some time for us to establish stability within the solution at the beginning. At this point, we find it to be quite stable except for the DPI SSL feature.

We had already scaled from the older version, the 5500, however, the 5600, is quite a new product. They have since changed the OS, so it ended up being a bit complex from the earlier version. The complexity is there, obviously. It's not that easy to manage. You really need to have someone with knowledge right there with you.

It is an internal firewall. All of our traffic, internal traffic, goes through this firewall only. There are somewhere around, at any point in time, 600, 700 users. We have total sync of 2,000 users, 2,000 plus. But at any point in time, 600 users are there, connected. It runs continuously, on a daily basis.

We've never contacted technical support in the past. We go through our vendor. We don't call SonicWall. 

While there are a lot of options on the market, we only use SonicWall at this time. We have used Sophos in the past previously. We found that Sophos Firewall had more flexibility compared to SonicWall, especially in the configuration capabilities.

he initial setup was actually it was done by our vendor partner. And it was not difficult for them. However, during the initial set up, we faced some issues. It was not easy until there were image upgrades, and now those issues are fixed. 

We've also outsourced the maintenance part of the solution's upkeep to our vendor. We only do the followup and we level call. Basic manageability, they do the operation, we manage at our end. Basic operations. But for other calls, we level call with the vendor.

We hired our vendor partner to do the initial implementation for us. We didn't handle it in-house.

I'm not sure what the pricing of the product is. It falls within a middle range in terms of pricing. It' not the cheapest or more expensive. 

The SSL VPN feature, which is what we needed to purchase, is a separate license.

There's a lot of firewalls available, including Cisco, FortiGate, and Juniper firewalls too. There are many alternatives.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with SonicWall.

I wouldn't recommend the solution, actually. It's hard to set up and the stability takes a while to establish. They need to do better on their software side, and other solutions, like Sophos, have more flexibility in their configuration capabilities.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is at the perimeter of all of our customer's sites with all of the security services turned on. That is anti-malware, anti-spyware, geo IP filtering is an important thing for us, web filtering and the Capture ATP. We are looking at preventing downloading of any virus-infected files.

Geo-IP filtering has made a large impact on us and it is very important to us.

The most valuable features to us are the security services which is a critical factor in our deployment. Today we need to have all the security services enabled because firewalls are not enough.

When it comes to security I think all of the features are currently open to improvement.

I have been using SonicWall NSa for the past ten to fifteen years.

Technical support used to be very good and now we are dealing with long response times.  On a scale of one to ten today we are looking at a four or five instead of a nine or ten.

The setup is straightforward however you want to have a good technical support individual involved for proper deployment.

I would rate SonicWall NSa a nine out of ten as an overall solution in security.

SonicWall NSa's most valuable features are the ease of configuration and the GUI. It's a web-based application, so we can easily configure all we want in the browser.

An area for improvement would be SonicWall NSa's integration with antiviruses. In the next release, SonicWall should include a wireless solution so we can implement the firewall in our networks and for wireless users and access points.

I've been using SonicWall NSa for about two years.

SonicWall NSa is a stable system that's really easy to handle and communicate with.

SonicWall's technical support is very responsive and helpful whenever we need support from them.

Positive

Previously, I worked with PMG Firewall, but SonicWall has a higher level of compatibility, and the integration between the software and hardware gives us more speed in traffic and processing the data over the firewall.

The initial setup was easy - we could implement rules for mapping, network traffic, and network address translation easily on our firewall. I would rate the ease of the setup as four out of five.

SonicWall NSa is a great choice for any growing company - it's really helpful, and it's suitable for networks with limited or unlimited users. I would rate SonicWall NSa as eight out of ten.

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.