Sophos Cyberoam UTM Reviews

The solution's web filtering is an important feature for us in our company. We  use it for VPN connections and routing.

I would like to see improvements in the development of reports. The process needs to be made simple. So, reporting needs improvement.

I have been working with Sophos Cyberoam UTM for about ten years. Also, my customers are using this product. My company is a reseller of the solution.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a stable solution.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a scalable solution. So, scalability and stability of a solution are two important factors for us in our company.

The solution's local technical support service is good. So, we don't need any other support.

I have experience with Sophos SG.

The initial setup for Sophos Cyberoam UTM was simple for me.

The solution's pricing is good since it is neither too high nor too low. The price is good for our company and customers. So, we have no problems with its pricing.

Considering the solution's interface, I can say that the product is easy to use. Also, the solution is compatible with other products. Moreover, it is easy to integrate it with other solutions. Overall, I rate this product a nine out of ten.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a security device. You can use it for unified threat management, advanced threat protection, and sandboxing.

I like Sophos Cyberoam UTM as a security component or device for organizations. Performance-wise, it's a satisfactory solution, and it works okay. It also has good features.

What needs improvement in Sophos Cyberoam UTM is openness in the competition among Sophos partners or any other Sophos product.

Another area for improvement in the solution is pricing. It could be cheaper.

I've been working with Sophos Cyberoam UTM since I started the company.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a stable solution.

The scalability of Sophos Cyberoam UTM depends on the organization's needs at different points in time.

I've never contacted the technical support for Sophos Cyberoam UTM because I have twenty-five years of experience with user solutions.

There wouldn't be an issue deploying Sophos Cyberoam UTM or any other UTM device for technical people because the basic concept remains the same for all vendors.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM needs cheaper pricing.

I have an IT company where I provide end-to-end IT infrastructure from servers to security products, firewalls to UTMs, including WiFi solutions.

I've provided Sophos Cyberoam UTM to a couple of customers.

I'm a technical solutions provider, and my team deploys solutions for customers.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM can be deployed on-premises and on the cloud.

I'd recommend Sophos Cyberoam UTM, but it would depend on the customer's requirements. The best product I recommend depends on the market report and how the customer interaction or experience evolved with a particular product. Still, Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a product I'd recommend.

My rating for Sophos Cyberoam UTM is six out of ten.

We use Sophos Cyberoam UTM to protect company networks from attacks from the internet and to separate internal networks into different nodes. The Intrusion Prevention system of Sophos Cyberoam UTM protects different networks from attacks from other networks. This includes the company's network or from the outside of the company's networks.

There are plenty of features that are valuable in the Sophos Cyberoam UTM. We use all the features, such as email Security, firewall rules, web server security, web devices, web protection.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM could improve by adding VPN site-to-site capabilities. The correct version does not work with Microsoft Azure Cloud.

I have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for approximately 18 years.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a very stable solution and it's a well-formed and clear-built solution. You can easily have flexibility in configuring. The Sophos XG has a strong connection to the cloud and that's not good for security.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 30 customers using this solution. We support other IT service providers who don't have knowledge about IT security.

The installation is straightforward. The length of time it takes for the implementation can vary drastically based on the organization's network structure. Addiotnanly, how well the organizations want to be protected. An easy installation can be done in two to three hours, and other implementations need much more time to prepare the firewall or to create an object. Adding more complexity to the installation can add one to three days.

The technical team that is needed to support the solution depends on the size of the organization. For smaller companies, we only need one technical engineer on our side and IT support from the customer. Larger companies with substantial-sized departments need much more support personnel. Additionally, we need one person from the management because we have to prepare outage times.

There are many options for payment of the subscription license. You purchase a subscription every one, two, or three years. You can also have monthly subscriptions but we typically offer subscriptions for three years because from the financial perspective it is better to have a three-year subscription.

We don't like Cloud solutions in the IT security area. Firewalls feature critical infrastructures, such as networks. We don't advise our customers to use Cloud solutions.

I would recommend Sophos Cyberoam UTM.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten.

We used it for the POC so we tried it. We used it continuously for testing purposes for four to five months.

I find Sophos very good. What I like about it is that users can make hotspots in Mac and Windows systems through this solution.

I also like the feature of being able to block off Mac IDs that host users. For example, you have a Mac or Windows laptop and you created a hotspot. Other devices like mobiles and tablets e.g. iPads connected to that hotspot. We can block those devices that are connected to the hotspot we created, only through Sophos.

It's a good feature we didn't find in other UTMs.

The product had a hang issue. We needed to reboot, recreate the image, and reconfigure the previous image because the product hanged frequently.

Being able to block applications and services could also be a product improvement.

We used this solution for four to five months.

The stability of this product is very good.

I find the scalability of this product very good.

Our experience with technical support is not good. I didn't understand if there was an issue with the physical device, or if it was a technical issue, or if it was their technical support. If our issues were properly managed, for sure we will purchase again, but we did not purchase because technical support is not good. They're not supportive as well.

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward.

We deployed it both in-house and through the vendor team.

In my team, I am capable of implementing Sophos. I tried implementing it with the vendor team who didn't have much of an idea and also saw that we weren't getting enough support from the Sophos technical team.

Suppose we have two side-to-side VPNs and we're using cloud servers. For example, my requirement is one public IP. If I go in any server part in the cloud, then I want one IP for sending data, while the other IP would be used for receiving data.

Sophos technical support couldn't help. Suppose we are already configured things on our Cisco router. They had no idea how to move the Cisco device configuration in Sophos. That was a big concern.

We deployed it physically via hardware, particularly the router, and not via cloud.

I evaluated Cisco Meraki.

We got was the PUC part only. We are not using it right now. We are currently using ASA.

The product often had hang issues which was why we stopped using it. We will purchase again if there were no hardware issues.

The pricing for this product is good. Though its quality may not be that good, its pricing is very low, enticing small businesses to purchase it over its competitors.

I'm giving it a rating of eight out of ten because the product is really good, but you need to prepare the team, including the team handling the vendors because there are too many devices in the market. Everyone in the team needs to know how to move these things in Sophos devices, or in Sophos cloud-based technologies and application software.

We are using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for network protection.

There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN. 

The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing.

I have been using this solution for approximately 15 years.

The solution is stable, we have not had any bugs or issues.

The solution is good for medium-sized businesses.

I have used many other network protection solutions, such as Fortinet.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for operating system security.

The geofencing and report blocking are the solution's most valuable aspects.

The solution is quite stable. The performance has been good overall.

The product is at its end-of-life. There is nothing to improve as it will be discontinued.

With technology such a Sophos, Palo Alto, and Fortinet there has always been a lot of online documentation, which Cyberoam always lacked.

We started using the solution in 2016 or 2017. It's been a few years.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite good overall. We find it reliable.

I haven't worked on scaling the solution, and therefore can't speak from personal experience on how well it would expand or how easy it would be. Our company is not in the process of expanding it out, either.

We have about 100 user on the solution currently.

The technical support was always good, however, it was never as good as the technical support offered by Sophos. They could have been more helpful and responsive. They could have been better at sharing information. However, it doesn't matter anymore, as we are moving on to Sophos.

We are now moving over to Sophos, as this solution is obsolete.

The initial setup is not complex. It's quite straightforward. A company wouldn't typically have any issues rolling it out.

I cannot recall how long our deployment took, exactly. It's been a few years since the process happened.

We did not require assistance from outside contractors when we did our initial implementation. We handled it in-house. We did not hire consultants or integrators.

The solution wasn't overly expensive. If you are covering your company from security risk, it's often worth the cost. Security solutions aren't something you want to cheap out on.

We're typically using the latest version of the solution. We update our policies every three years and continue to update them. 

The product is obsolete and we have moved over to Sophos.

Generally, I would tend to recommend Sophos XE to users.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

I'm using Cyberoam in close to nine locations.

We are using, for example, IP sets from Kenya to Somalia, a place where we could not get MPLS connectivity. 

We have a secondary server in the Somalia office. I also use it from the Nairobi office to the Dubai office as the MPLS is very expensive and I need to do a backup daily. That is for the IP sec. 

For the VPN, we use it to access our ERP systems remotely from everywhere. Close to a hundred users use it and it has been stable.

The VPN is excellent on the solution. 

The reporting aspect of the solution is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward. A company should have any troubles setting it up in their organization.

The reports are not very detailed, or, at least, some aspects of it are not that detailed. They need to improve the reporting and to bring in greater detail.

The policy is a bit too vague. The solution needs to be much clearer when they go about making policies.

I'd like to see better documentation in the future.

I've been using the solution for the last five years.

Overall, the stability has been excellent. I've only had an issue with one device which had a power surge that destroyed it and I replaced it. So far, so good. I've never had it with latency issues with the memory going down. It has been good. It has served me well.

We have many offices. There may be 300 to 400. So far, it hasn't been an issue.

The technical support is good. Our license is the eight to five, not 24/7. Once you raise a ticket through the chat, you open it with another ticket with the account. Anytime when you open a ticket, they're very efficient. I've never had an issue with them. We're quite satisfied with their level of service. 

The initial setup is not complex. It's straightforward. I haven't had an issue with the process at all. It's been easy.

Basically, for most of the machines, we take a backup of it. Once I get a new machine, I install the backup with all my policies and everything set, and I only change the IP. 

We are thinking of getting another firewall. I'm currently comparing Cisco Meraki, Fortinet, and Sophos. We're trying to see the cost and comparing them on a few points.

Any past evaluation was a long time ago. Before I joined the organization, the organization evaluated Cisco. Nowadays, Cisco, Meraki, and other options came out, and they might not have as many features. 

We are a customer and end-user.

We are using various versions, including 100iNG, 50iNG, and 25iNG.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. There's always room for improvement, although mostly we have been happy with it.

I am using the solution mostly internally for security, a firewall and internet. We have a lot of users with many user policies. Additionally, we use it for a DOS-specific file exchange.

The solution is easy to integrate.

I had an issue when I was trying to stop a user from using too much bandwidth while I was using Azure, I was not able to stop them. You normally can just right click and block them but in this solution, it was not working in the firewall settings.

I have been using the solution for 10 years.

I was running the solution for seven years and I did not have issues. I would rate the stability a four out of five.

For a medium-sized organization, the scalability was good.

The support was good. Whenever I needed to contact to support to create tickets, they contact me within a reasonable time and they resolved the issues.

The setup was easy.

On a yearly basis, it cost me approximately $1,500. While having 400 users and comparing the price to other solutions, what I was paying yearly was good.

Cyberoam is going to end this year. They already have announced last year if you are an enterprise and have the support it will end.

What I have learned from using this solution is when choosing another product in the future I will do more technical feature comparisons. Having done the comparisons I most likely would not have been having some of the issues I was having because I would have gone with another solution.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM a seven out of ten.