SonicWall TZ Reviews

We have multiple branches, and we have configured SonicWall VPNs for branch-to-branch connectivity through IPSec. I am also restricting websites to protect us from hackers, torrents, games, and other such things. I am using SonicWall TZ 400 series.

Most of the features are useful. It is easy to configure and easy to troubleshoot.

I can see the utilization of different networks, and there are also App control features. 

FortiGate has a client DNS in the firewall, but SonicWall doesn't have that. To create or configure a site-to-site VPN tunnel, we have to give a DNS name. Currently, we have to get the DNS name from a third party and then include it in SonicWall, whereas FortiGate has its own client DNS, so it provides a DNS name, and it does not require a third party.

There should be a graphical option to view the network utilization and bandwidth usage.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. We have 100 users of this solution. We might increase its usage in the future in about eight months.

Their technical support is good. They are very helpful. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

We were using ESET Antivirus for endpoint security. For firewalls, we were using FortiGate and MikroTik firewalls. FortiGate is fine, and it is helpful and easy, but MikroTik is not. It can't stop attacks from hackers.

In addition to SonicWall TZ, we are now using Cloud App Security from SonicWall for endpoint security, and we have Email Security from SonicWall for emails. In addition, we are using Capture Client from SonicWall for endpoint protection. All these solutions are very helpful, easy to configure, and easy to troubleshoot.

It was straightforward. It took five to ten minutes.

I would recommend this solution. We plan to keep using this solution. We have recently renewed our license, and we don't have any plans to use any other solution.

I would rate SonicWall TZ an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to secure our network environment. We have implemented it in other locations in our organization.

It's a good solution with good features.

It's a good product, but it's not a next-generation firewall. We are looking for a next-generation firewall and considering Cisco.

We require centralized monitoring of the network features, which they have but they are not to the level that we require.

The reporting is not good. Also, the historical configuration of the data or backup is not available.

To compete in the market, there have to be a lot of improvements.

We do not plan to continue using SonicWall TZ. We are looking for a replacement because we need centralized monitoring across the organization. It has been very difficult for us to manage the firewall as it is not managed centrally. This is the main drawback in our current scenario.

In the next release, I would like to see better scalability, easier installation, improved reporting, storage configuration, backup, and centralized management with reporting.

I have been using this solution for four years.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable product.

It is not very scalable, which is something that could be better.

We have multiple locations and have implemented it in several.

At this time, we have 1,000 users on the firewall.

Technical support is good. There is no need for improvement.

We did not use another firewall previously.

The installation is not straightforward. But, through the GUI, there are features that you can enable to configure.

Forcepoint and Cisco are straightforward but there are many things to do with SonicWall.

For a first-time installation, it can take half a day to deploy.

We completed the implementation ourselves.

The license that we purchased is good for three years.

We have evaluated ForcePoint but we haven't used it.

We will be testing Cisco and Barracuda in our environment.

For small organizations, its' good, and I would recommend it, but not for medium or large enterprise companies.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a five out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for its firewall capabilities.

The best thing about the product is the very good threat prevention output.

The dashboard needs to be improved.

They can work on the GUI part of the solution. Currently, it is a little bit complicated as compared to other competitors.

Each uplink is quite a big and complicated sort of tool. Other products, like Checkpoint, are so-so, however, they are better. Fortinet is a good example of one that is very good and easy to use.

I've been working with the solution for four to five years.

The stability is excellent. We find it to be reliable. We haven't had any issues at all.

We consider growing the solution based on the company's needs. We work with different sizes of organizations. We try to project out what a company will need, not tomorrow, but three years down the line, and build for that on day one.

We do this due to the fact that it's not exactly scalable. We build it bigger so organizations can grow into the solution quite a bit. Users are restricted by the model of the firewall, so if you choose something that's too small, it won't be able to meet your needs and you'll have to start over and trade up to a bigger model.

If a TZ series can handle 500 users, and a company currently has 200 users, they'll be able to scale up, technically speaking, to about 300 more users before they hit their threshold.

Basically, the scalability is not infinite. It's quite limited to the capacity of the model itself.

We've never dealt with technical support. We've managed to handle any issues ourselves, in-house. I can't speak to the kind of service they provide.

I also have experience with Sophos XG.

I find that there aren't too many differences between firewalls, as everyone has the same platform and goals.

The initial setup is not complex. It's very straightforward. We found it to be quite easy.

It may take a while to deploy the solution, at least here in Haiti. It will take longer than a few hours. Depending on the client, it can take anywhere from a day or two to up to ten or 15 days.

It's all dependent on the customer side. What will define the length of time will be is the mobile policy they want to implement on the firewall. That depends on the customer.

You only need one person to deploy and maintain the solution.

We're resellers. We handle the implementation for our clients.

We use this solution ourselves, however, we also deploy it for our clients. We're resellers.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

I don't know if I have specific advice, as each customer is different and has different needs in terms of security. It depends on their policies and how they want to implement them. There are almost endless amounts of policies that can be added to the solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We are an MSP and Sonicwall partner and have installed virtually every model, from the TZ 150 during the old days, up to the new TZ 500, TZ 600s and NSA series. I've been using SonicWall for many years and it's still a major part of our solutions for many of our customers compared the optional product lines that we sell. I previous owned an IT firm for 30 years and recently merged with a larger organization where I focus on customer security and guidance. 

Sonic has been very progressive, continually updating their product-line and service offerings to stay current with, and ahead of the evolving security landscape. Again, they have consistently developed great solutions for both the SMB and enterprise market which has enable our support team to leverage their expertise with Sonicwall across our entire client base.

The most valuable features are the ease of setup, ease of management, integration, the VPN integration andnet extender which is part of their remote access, and functionality. Overall, they've been very effective and it's an affordable product. 

Not relating to this product specifically, but I think overall the company needs to think more broadly about security continuity across the entire security spectrum and integrate more security options with their solutions, like Cisco is doing. They need identity management products and DNS solutions to really complete the line of security. Because of the whole management system, there could also be improvement to their GMS, which is a system allowing you to manage an entire fleet of their firewalls via a central pane of glass. Today as more organizations as forced to working from home and the security perimeter is now the home, businesses need more affordable and scalable systems to manage and monitor numerous devices, more easily and push out updates through essential platforms.

I've been using this solution for over 15 years. 

I find it a very stable product and company. We really have not had problems with functionality or support. The ability to meet customer needs and implement security features, as well as just the reliability of the hardware itself has been very good over the years.

Scalability is good but once you buy the product itself, you're limited to what that particular device can deliver in terms of throughput and add-on features. You can easily add on additional functionality through various software/licensing, but it can't scale up more than the product's physical limitations. To address this, Sonicwall does have an upgrade program to enable organizations to capitalize on any investments made in training and management tools.

Obviously they have a dedicated support team for firewalls in general, unless you get to the bigger enterprise products. That's a different team. We find that whenever we have problems, we can get to somebody within a reasonable period of time.

We also provide CISCO solutions our clients where it may be a better fit.  The decision on which solutions to use can be influenced by either existing infrastructure and/or the experience and resources the customer may have inhouse.  Additionally, product feature-set and customer needs play the biggest role in determining what is the best fit for the customer.

Initial setup is quite straightforward via Sonicwall's GUI.

I can't talk about specifics, but purchasing the product is an upfront capital expense for maintenance as well as for the product itself so I can't amortize that down to a monthly or annual figure because the products are also very diverse in price depending on the usage or the package that you get. There are a very broad number of products within the TZ series from the very low end to the medium range. You've got many different models to choose from at different price points. On top of that, you've got the maintenance agreements that are relatively priced based on the product, so that is a variable too. I know that they are very competitive in pricing compared to other solutions on the market.

It's worth looking into this solution. It's a very competitive product in terms of pricing, performance and features. It's definitely worth evaluating, especially for small to medium size businesses, branch offices and home. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We use the solution to control and protect access between our various locations.

With this solution, our facilities are able to act as one, easily sharing resources. 

It protects against intrusion while allowing needed access. 

It needs more robust self-help documentation along with examples and things to watch out for. 

We have been using the solution for more than ten years.

The stability is great.

The solution works well.

Positive

Nothing is as robust and complete as SonicWall devices.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward and is particularly straightforward when upgrading.

Our implementation was done in a combination due to locations.

We have seen a 100% ROI. There are no intrusions. 

It was chosen by an IT support company.

Try it, you'll be glad you did, as you'll find a new peace of mind.

The solution is used for firewall protection with our customers.

Stability is the most valuable feature of the solution.

The cost of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for ten years.

The solution is stable.

The solution can be used for small, and medium companies as long as the organization has the budget for it. I recommend Cisco Meraki for enterprise companies because it works on the cloud and is more scalable.

The solution is expensive.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend the solution.

The primary use case for this solution is as a Network Firewall.

This solution protects the network. It lets me monitor in live time if someone is 'hogging' bandwidth. It lets me block websites, and the list goes on.

It is a very nice tool to have on the school network.

The most valuable features are for the protection of data, and IE Intrusion on the network.

I would like to see lower antivirus pricing.  So far I haven't found any situation that I needed anything else added/included.

I have been using this solution for five years.

The stability is good.

The scalability is good.

The customer service is always very good!

I did not use any other solutions. I only ever used SonicWall.

The setup was straightforward.  We had an existing SonicWall.

We implemented the solution in house.

This solution has an easy setup, good support, and reasonable pricing.

I did not evaluate any other options.

I am very satisfied with the solution.

I was a technical consultant, and I was helping clients out. I've had two clients. Both of them have had SonicWall, and both of them have gone through upgrades.

It does what it says it is going to do.

The user support could be improved because you have to go outside to get that kind of support.

I have been using this solution for five years.

We haven't used it. We've had to go outside and get technical support through a third party.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.