Sophos Central Reviews

We use the product to maintain uptime during the configuration process. It monitors device security as well.

The platform’s most valuable feature is seamless integration with other Sophos products, including Sophos Firewall, Sophos AV, and their Managed Detection and Response (MDR) service. It helps manage all the components from one centralized portal.

We have been using Sophos Central for two and a half years.

It is the most stable version out of all the firewalls by Sophos Central. I rate the stability a nine or ten.

We manage over 100 clients for Sophos Central. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The technical support services are good.

We use different products. The main reason for using Sophos Central is the cloud integration features.

The initial setup with Sophos Central, encompassing deployment for firewalls, AV, and other products, has been straightforward. It involves a two-step deployment process. We have to add a firewall to the route. Further, we have to deploy the configuration, and it starts working. It takes around 15 minutes to complete.

The product generates a return on investment.

The product has a reasonable price considering the cybersecurity services it offers.

I recommend Sophos Central to others as it is a single cloud integration service. I rate it a nine out of ten.

I use Sophos Central to manage both our endpoint protection and firewalls.

It's a great solution.  For our customers and us, the endpoint solution works well. The technology itself is good, no problem with the security.

The integration of artificial intelligence improves security posture. When we don't identify or are exposed in the sandbox environment, AI is interesting for that.

It is easy to save time using the Sophos Central centralized dashboard. It's definitely easier because you're in one place with all the products. But when connecting to a public IP address for a firewall, for example, it's faster to access directly than going through Sophos Central. For files and endpoints, though, Central is easier and faster to use.

The feature we use in Sophos Central is very interesting to us. It is synchronized security. 

When the endpoint detects a user trying to use an app, it sends information to the firewall, and the firewall can create rules to temporarily stop or allow the network connection. It's very interesting.

There's an issue with Sophos France, where their policies differ from Sophos Global. For example, we're a customer in China. 

For years, I've tried contacting resellers in China or Sophos China to deploy firewalls there. It's impossible to do business with Sophos when they don't answer our questions. That's the situation. 

We simply can't have a proper conversation with Sophos China. They seem uninterested in international exchange.

Pushing global rules and policies to all devices from Central isn't easy. You can do it for all endpoints, which is fine. But you can't do the same with firewalls. 

Firewall management with Central is very limited. You can connect one firewall to another and tell it, "I want one policy for all my customer's firewalls," but that's not possible. For a customer with multiple firewalls, you can't say, "This works for France, Great Britain, Canada," and push it. It's not possible.

I have been using it for ten years. 

It is a stable solution. 

It is a scalable solution. 

We have small and medium-level businesses as our customers. 

The customer service and support used to be good. Right now, it is okay.  

In France, many technicians have lost jobs, and new ones are coming, but they are not knowledgeable.  There's a problem of human interference in India. We need English support to solve product issues.

Worldwide support is needed because French support doesn't understand. They say, "Okay, report to legal, stage two." It's not good. We have ten years' experience. We don't need to explain every time. We call support because we're important. We need a response. Not, "I'll take the question to another level." 

Negative

For all types of endpoints: Windows, macOS, Linux. We used Sophos Intercept X but recently made the decision to switch to ESET Endpoint Security, a European security solution.

ESET has more main functions than regular performance. We can do much more with it to match the PC, to match the OS. We can do a lot of customization with ESET.

We're planning to switch both our endpoint and firewall solutions.

The initial setup is easy. After ten years of experience, I can do it in 15 minutes. 

I deployed it myself. One person is enough for the deployment. 

However, maintenance is hard. It's hard because changing or replacing hardware is very difficult with Sophos due to license terms. This is especially true with High Availability firewalls, where you have one active and two on standby. Taking out the new firewall and making it work isn't straightforward. It requires a lot of maintenance to get the solution back in a good state.

It's very difficult for us to see an ROI because our customers don't see it as an investment. It's like insurance. They pay for good work, but for them, having no security issues isn't the main concern. 

Our customers don't have any IT personnel and they don't care about security.

Most of our clients don't want to be interested in security because it's too difficult for them.

It is not cheap, it is expensive. The price is too much. 

I do currently use Sophos, and I was looking into potentially switching our customers to PFSense or OpenSense for endpoint protection. I wanted to research and understand if it would be a beneficial move.

Overall, I would rate the solution a five out of ten. It is not easy to push global policies and support needs improvement. 

In my company, the solution is used for the firewall. The tool is used to monitor and create firewalls for the organization's internet since the company's network is on the internet.

Sophos Central Identity Integration Pack is a very accommodating and easy-to-understand feature for blocking other websites, especially the social media website. The features of the tool are good for protecting our organization from websites like social media websites or social engineering websites. I find the ability to use the product to test websites to be useful for our organization's network.

The high price of the tool is a drawback that can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Sophos Central for two months. I am a customer of the solution.

There are around 20 users of the solution in my organization.

I use Sophos Central and the Sophos Firewall XG Series.

When I joined the organization, I found Sophos Central already installed in the company's environment. Considering the installation of the product was easily done on an on-premises version, the hardware components from Sophos were connected to the network cables of the organization, and it was easy to understand everything when I saw it for the first time.

The product's installation phase was easy.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

It is an expensive tool.

Based on the advancement in technologies, security reasons, and cybersecurity, my organization wanted a tool that ensured us a more secure environment.

The tool does work in managing security for multiple devices since the product is available at multiple prices and there are multiple licensing models. In my organization, the tool is used to manage around 30 devices easily.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

Our primary focus at this site is on enhancing security measures through the acquisition of a firewall. We are specifically addressing security needs at the moment, with other aspects being managed using existing solutions.

It is highly effective because it operates in real-time, swiftly detecting malware and viruses on both endpoints and firewalls. The synchronization between endpoint detection and firewall response is a key advantage. For instance, if malware is identified on an endpoint, the information is seamlessly synchronized and applied to the firewall, allowing for immediate group-level blocking. This integrated approach is immensely beneficial as it eliminates the need for separate management of endpoints and firewalls, streamlining our security operations.

There is considerable room for service improvement, especially based on a recent experience with the RMX. The device we requested took seven to ten days to be delivered, and the inconvenience continued as we had to travel over thirty kilometers to pick it up. The current service level is not as efficient as desired, but we acknowledge that it presents an area for improvement, particularly in terms of support concentration. Occasionally, the firewall seems to cause a complete traffic halt, even though the system indicates that traffic is flowing. To resolve this, we have to restart the Sophos firewall. It would be beneficial if Sophos could provide options for shorter-term licenses, such as one or two months, allowing for more adaptability in licensing and cost management.

I have been using it for three years.

The stability of the system has been a concern as we had to reboot Sophos in random scenarios. Instances of traffic getting stuck and load-balancing issues have been observed. It's worth noting that load-balancing is not automated in my current device; instead, I have to configure it manually.

I would rate its scalability abilities seven out of ten. 

The technical support provided is commendable, even though it might take some time. The support team demonstrates a high level of expertise and foundation, earning them a score of nine out of ten in terms of skill level.

Positive

In comparison to our previous use of CyberArk, the current system proves to be significantly better. CyberArk is excellent, especially in an enterprise context. While I won't make direct comparisons with other solutions like Tabidoo, FortiGate, or Cisco, FortiGate stands out as a strong and competitive option.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The deployment process may take more than three to four hours, but it's relatively straightforward. A single engineer should be able to configure the firewall model without encountering any issues.

Apart from the mentioned licensing issue, Sophos has proven to be a very effective and cost-saving solution. The dashboard provides a wealth of reports, including customer reports, at almost no additional cost. The integration between the endpoint and CyberArk through the support center has resulted in significant cost savings. The return on investment is impressive, especially considering the quick access to comprehensive reports on malware attacks and other issues within our virtual settings. It has provided substantial benefits and streamlined our operations effectively.

Sophos is more cost-effective than other vendors. However, we've encountered an issue regarding license flexibility. For our corporate offices and multiple sites across India, we sometimes need short-term licenses due to the nature of our projects. While purchasing a new firewall solution, we requested a license for the next two months, but Sophos only offers licenses for one or two years. This lack of flexibility can be a hindrance, especially when considering the cost implications.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

My role is to bridge the gap between customer needs and my team's technical expertise. We collaborate to design and implement solutions that fit their specific requirements.

We cater to a wide range of organizations, from large enterprises in banking to small and medium businesses, call centers, and warehouses. Essentially, any company registered in Pakistan that requires endpoint security, next-generation firewalls, or other cybersecurity solutions can consider us.

The ransomware protection is exceptional, offering a strong defense against outsider attacks and viruses. This has proven extremely valuable to customers facing ransomware threats.

One significant advantage is its competitive dashboard compared to Trend Micro. 

I did encounter a limitation during a Proof of Concept with a large customer. The DLP (Data Loss Prevention) functionality wasn't fully functional when enabled in the central dashboard. I reported this to the distributor and technical team but couldn't get a definitive answer.

In future releases, I would like to see a complete XDR solution in Sophos. I want to see its capability. I want to understand how it works compared to Trend Micro, specifically its features and how it gears up.

Moreover, integration options with Trend Micro would be ideal, too.

I've been with Sophos Central for about three and a half years now, so I've been exposed to Sophos Central through customer interactions and team collaborations.

We work with a range of solutions, including Sophos XDR, Endpoint Protection (both cloud and on-prem), and Central. Additionally, we've sold the XG Firewall in the past.

The stability is almost a ten out of ten. We haven't encountered any issues.

The solution has been very stable. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It is very good in terms of scalability.

We have around seven to eight customers using this solution.  We have large enterprises and small to medium enterprises as our customers.

The OEM support is excellent, and the second-level distributors like SoftStack and Avan Distribution have the technical expertise. 

As a partner, we also have sales and after-sales teams with expertise in troubleshooting and resolving customer issues. 

Positive

Setting it up is easy. Compared to Kaspersky or Trend Micro, it's no more difficult. Sophos is user-friendly. 

I would rate my experience with the setup a nine out of ten; one is difficult, and ten is easy. It is very easy; there's always room for improvement.

We have both cloud and on-premises deployment models. The cloud is a bit expensive compared to the on-premises version. The deployment model depends on the customers. 

We actually operate as a cloud solution provider ourselves. We have a sister company called CloudKind, and we offer various cloud environments through our own data centers. We deploy HCI solutions and complete cloud solutions and even offer VM solutions for customers. They can get Infrastructure as a Service, Platform as a Service, Software as a Service, Disaster Recovery as a Service... everything comes from our cloud, not AWS or any other external provider.

I focus on commercial aspects like pitching features and convincing customers. Once we receive a confirmed order and payment, we send it to our distributor, EZ Technology, which handles license key distribution and activation over email. The post-sales team then takes over, working with the customer to configure and manage the deployment based on their specific needs and devices.

The deployment usually takes around three to four weeks. It's safe to say three to four weeks. It depends on our team's workload and the customer's availability. Since customers are running live applications, they usually provide us access outside their working hours, like after 6:00 P.M. or 8:00 PM. That's why deploying the DDR and Central dashboard solution takes three to four weeks.

I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with one being the cheapest and ten being the most expensive. It is rather expensive. 

Compared to Kaspersky's EDR and centralized solution, which offers more discounts, Sophos Central seems a bit more expensive. That's our observation so far.

I always tailor my advice to the customer's specific needs. If their top priority is protection against ransomware and ICS/IDH attacks, I recommend Sophos. 

For complex networks with a large threat landscape, Trend Micro's XDR solution might be a better fit. Ultimately, I analyze the customer's network and requirements before suggesting the most suitable solution. I don't favor any specific brand like Trend Micro, IBM, or Kaspersky.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We incorporate it into our demo for its cloud-based security solution, similar to Trend Micro Logistics, ensuring robust security for both client machines and servers. The inclusion of features enhances the user experience, providing a friendly and intuitive interface.

It's highly valuable as it ensures that no unauthorized installations occur without the IT team's permission, maintaining a secure environment. This allows for precise application of security measures, similar to a firewall, where connectivity and application definitions are meticulously managed. The protection and enterprise-level features are commendable, offering robust control and firewall management for designated machines. Additionally, encryption can be applied seamlessly through the support center, providing comprehensive control over all aspects of security. The backend protection further enhances the overall security posture.

Vulnerability protection and monitoring any changes are crucial aspects that require attention. Considering the specific requirements of the banking sector where constant internet usage may not be permissible, it might be worthwhile for the company to reconsider offering an on-premises solution. This would cater to users who prefer or require an in-house solution due to security and permission concerns associated with internet networks. The DLP feature is present, but it may not be considered a comprehensive DLP solution and it should be improved.

I would rate its stability capabilities seven out of ten.

It caters to a wide range of customers, including small and medium enterprises. It is versatile and adaptable, working effectively in various scenarios and meeting the diverse needs of its user base, regardless of the size or type of business.

I would rate its customer service and support eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup posed some complexities in the process.

Being a cloud solution eliminates the need to set up client-server arrangements for databases as everything is readily available. You just need to create a login account, sign in, download or deploy the agent on servers, and apply policies. However, a lightweight agent is essential to prevent any adverse impact on machine performance during evaluation. The deployment process can be completed in five minutes.

The price is relatively affordable. When compared to other vendors, it is a more cost-effective option. I would rate it six out of ten.

If you're focused on client security, I recommend opting for Sophos Central. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

We are a vendor. In the last company, we were a platinum partner of Sophos. So we provided services to other businesses, like corporate businesses or many businesses.

I have deployed it in many scenarios. Many customer days come to us, and they're migrating their services, like, services to Sophos, like the other firewall to Sophos. They deploy a new one. So we tried different scenarios, like an active firewall with central services, central with active-active firewall, and the support central endpoint services. There are so many scenarios.

Sophos Central is good. It's also free for all those firewalls because, from Sophos Central, we manage the firewalls and push the policies to the firewall. 

Also, we manage the Endpoint with the endpoint and firewall, with Sophos Central in view, monitoring all the policies, logs, and various features in the Sophos Central orchestration features. 

We can push templates to all the firewalls, and they are updated automatically with the Central. It syncs automatically, and all the firewalls appear in Sophos firewall in our environment. So we can manage all firewalls, push policies, log our endpoint to endpoints, and update endpoints. Also, see the protection policy and all the various features.

There are areas of improvement because there are license restrictions.

In future releases, I would like to see more awareness about this product. Most customers don't know about Sophos Central. Sometimes, I have to ask customers to use Sophos Central because they don't know it exists. 

It's not well-marketed, so many customers don't know about this feature. Many vendors use firewalls, but they don't use Sophos Central. For example, if you have five firewalls, the reporting limit might be reached. So, many customers don't know about Sophos Central, and I sometimes have to force them to use it.

The stability of Sophos Central is generally good. Sometimes, issues arise due to server distribution, particularly from my region in Pakistan. There are two data centers, which can cause browsing delays. Overall, most of the time, it functions well, but there are occasional lapses due to these data center issues. Overall, I would rate the stability as seven out of ten.

I've noticed regional difficulties, such as high latency from the vendor's server. Generally, it's about eighty percent effective, but there are times when it's problematic.

I would rate its scalability an eight out of ten. As a partner, we handle multiple scenarios. Sometimes it's hundreds of end users, sometimes thousands, and sometimes it's even more. The number of end users varies from time to time.

The support is good. Initially, they escalate issues through the L1 and L2 engines. Often, the first few emails or days can be less productive, but after that, the L2 team becomes more engaged. For partners, I suggest a different support channel, which should allow direct quality reporting.

Neutral

We worked with Kaspersky and other key solutions. Each has its strengths, but for robust security and support features, Sophos Central is preferable. I find its antivirus software and firewall solutions to be highly effective.

The initial setup is easy. It's very user-friendly. We can push policies through the GUI, like threat protection and file protection. Scanning protection begins with the GUI. It's no problem. 

But for deployment, it's difficult, just like deployment purposes. If you're going to deploy the endpoint, it is difficult to deploy the central. We can go through the systems or through the active directory or something, but there are no other features like this.

There's no need to deploy. It's on the cloud. We have to create an account and sync our antivirus. It takes about three to five minutes to sync.

The pricing is very competitive. When compared to other vendors like Fortinet, Sophos stands out, especially in terms of firewall and endpoint pricing. It's more affordable than other American brands, and while not as cheap as Chinese brands, the quality and pricing balance is excellent.

On a scale, I would rate it a ten out of ten.  I would emphasize the range of features like DLP, file label protection, and user policies that align with your organizational needs. Sophos Central offers comprehensive protection and a variety of policy-based solutions that are highly beneficial for any organization.

We use Sophos Central to ensure compliance activity.

Sophos Central is a user-friendly solution, and its configuration is very easy. The most valuable features of Sophos Central are total threat hunting and detection response.

Sophos Central must incorporate a diagrammatic graphical user interface for its practices and compliances.

I have been using Sophos Central for two years.

I rate Sophos Central a nine out of ten for stability.

Sophos Central is a scalable solution. Around 1,500 users are using the solution in our organization.

I rate Sophos Central a nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s technical support is very good.

Positive

The solution’s initial deployment is very easy.

One engineer can deploy the solution in around three days.

We have seen a return on investment with Sophos Central because its threat-hunting detection is very good. The solution has saved around 60% of our organization’s money.

Sophos Central is moderately priced. We have to pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate Sophos Central's pricing a six to seven out of ten.

Before choosing Sophos Central, we evaluated other options like SonicWall, Juniper, and WatchGuard. We chose Sophos Central because of the cost and better endpoint detection.

Sophos Central is deployed on-cloud in our organization. The solution’s maintenance is easy and can be done by one person.

As the endpoint and applications increase in an organization, Sophos Central can detect and protect from Trojans, viruses, and spyware.

Overall, I rate Sophos Central an eight out of ten.