Sophos Cyberoam UTM Reviews

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.

The majority of it is on-premise protecting the external to internal and then we utilize the features inside the Cyberoam XG series like their IPS and their web application firewall to do the filtering as well as their proxy server inside the application control.

I'm more inclined towards the conventional firewall. So for me, I'm more geared towards the standard firewall type functionalities as well as the web application firewall because that seems to work fine.

I would say there's room for improvement in terms of the GUI. Because it is better than some of the other standard firewalls. They have the drag and drop features.

Also, their logging systems need improvement because their logging systems sometimes look a bit complicated if you're not familiar with it.

We have been using Sophos since the XG version, so around four to five years. 

It's quite stable. When they first started out with the XG series it was a bit buggy but after a few releases, it became quite stable.

The XG series is much better compared to the previous UTM. Because with the XG series you can actually approach the enterprise level. Previously we tried to go for these large enterprises when we talked about the Sophos Firewall. When they moved to Cyberoam XG series Firewall they were much more scalable and they're much more robust compared to earlier ones. 

Most of our clients are enterprise-size. We have one customer that's using almost about 200 units of the XG series firewall. Then we have other customers using it on their larger network, so they cater to about 300 to almost 500 users

I don't have any problems with technical support so far because any time I ever contacted technical support it was for a major issue. Other than that I don't have any issues with technical support.

I previously worked with Nokia, Checkpoint, and FortiGate. Checkpoint is in the enterprise range, it is very high end. It's not a very cheap product compared because when it comes to pricing Checkpoint is very expensive. If you're comparing Sophos to FortiGate they are more or less similar. FortiGate can do a virtual firewall that Sophos cannot.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment is very fast. With an engineer, it can take a few hours. 

Sophos is quite flexible when it comes to pricing.

I would just say keep it simple, don't make it too complex. Keep it simple and then from there scale it up.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

To make it a higher score, Sophos should look at the virtual firewall feature because most of the current players like Juniper have the option for a virtual firewall. That way you can actually split up into multiple different firewalls or one physical firewall.

We use Cyberoam UTM as a firewall.

Cyberoam UTM's most valuable feature is that it can be configured any way you like.

The configuration requires an expert to be set up, so it could be made simpler.

I've been using Cyberoam UTM for over a year. 

Cyberoam UTM is very stable.

We chose Sophos because it's presented as being scalable in any way if you have the license.

Sophos' technical support is good.

The initial setup is complex and requires the presence of an expert.

We used the supplier's team, who did not live up to our expectations - we even had to assist them in reading the manual.

Separate license keys are required for different solutions that we implement in the server room, which are an additional cost.

Cyberoam UTM is a very good product, but those installing it should make sure they have the right technical person there when implementing it. I would give this solution a score of eight out of ten.

It's a UTM device, unified threat management, and we use it for web and application filtering and of course to scan the traffic that comes from the internet to the LAN. Due to the pandemic issues and people working from home, a lot of these devices were configured for the SSL VPN.

The endpoint protection part of the product can all be centrally managed from the cloud as well. Even the firewall, as an MSP, can be configured and then managed from the cloud.

The solution is excellent for web and application filtering and remote access with the VPN.

The initial setup is pretty easy.

The solution is stable and reliable. 

Sometimes, during part of the configuration, if you don't have a lot of technical knowledge, then you may struggle a bit to configure it - especially for the exit through the internal server. When you are doing the business application publishing and if you don't know much of the port forwarding or how the business application configuration is done, then you may struggle a bit.

The pricing could always be better. It would make it a win-win for everyone.

I'm currently configuring one right now. I've been using the solution for a while.

The solution is very stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

There are modular firewalls. The entry-level devices do not have the slot for adding more network ports or things like that. Therefore, it depends on the organization as to what level of configuration they want. If it's a small organization, then the entry-level product, something like XG86 or XG115 et cetera, all those are sufficient. However, if it's an organization that requires adding more ports or more cards to their plans, then starting with an appliance version XG125 is ideal as it has the optional modular port whereby you can add additional cards.

Technical support is okay. I had issues with the technical support in that they did not respond on time. However, we have to deal with the different time zones.

The solution is pretty straightforward. Within 10 minutes, it was put in production on the network.

In-house certified team implementation

Licensing is on a yearly basis. They also offer a month-to-month extension if required. After 12 months, if your license expires and you want to exchange it for one month or two months, then that is possible as well.

The pricing on the partner portals is okay. The challenge comes as there's sort of a monopoly for the distributor in Tanzania. There is just one distributor and that is where the challenge comes. Sometimes the distributor is out of stock or they set up their own freight charges. Sometimes they're out of stock and the stock takes maybe four to six weeks and is then delayed. Basically, the challenge comes up when the distributor is out of stock.

Before choosing this option, we looked at Cisco ASA, Fortinet, and Juniper.

We're a gold partner. We configure it for our clients on-premises. 

Cyberoam was actually taken over by Sophos about three years ago.

The latest versions were announced just about a few weeks ago, if not more. It was the XGS Firewall. So what I'm configuring right now is a Sophos XG firewall.

It's just a firewall. Basically, it's the hardware. Either you have the hardware or you can have it as a virtual machine.

I'd recommend the solution to other users.

I'd rate the product at a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for its firewall capabilities. We use it to make a firewall for the network and the two main computers as well as our web pages. 

The solution works really well overall.

It's quite easy to configure everything, which is a great selling point for us. You can easily adjust the users and load balances, for example. We can make our own rules and input as many as we like. 

The firewall is very good. It provides a nice amount of security.

The solution has good load balancers.

We've found the solution to be very stable.

So far, we've found the scalability to be acceptable.

The installation process is pretty easy.

A user needs to do some training on the solution in order to take full advantage of the product.

There needs to be more documentation that users can access to help them understand the solution or troubleshoot as necessary. Right now, this is lacking quite a bit.

Beyond that, there aren't really any missing features that I can recall. I can't speak to what I would like to see in a future release.

The stability of the solution is quite good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and offers us a good performance. 

The product is quite scalable. If a company needs to scale it up, it can do so. It's not a problem.

We have at least 500 users on the product currently.

I don't have any experience with technical support. I have never used them and therefore can't speak to how responsive or knowledgeable they might be.

We used to use Kerio Control. I actually liked using it, however, we only had it for about eight or nine months before moving off of it. That said, I didn't have the skills to manage the solution properly.

We have found the initial installation process to be straightforward and easy. It's not overly complex or difficult. A company should be able to manage it rather easily.

If you connect it then you can adjust the web page and the IP and you can make a batch configuration. Then you can simply connect to the tower. It's not hard.

The deployment maybe took three or so hours. It wasn't a long amount of time. That includes handling all of the configurations as well.

We have five members that make up a technical team that can handle deployment and maintenance. Two are administrators. One is a security admin and the other is a network admin. Those are the two that mostly manage everything and have the rights to do so.

At the time, we used a consultant to assist us in the process. They were quite knowledgeable and helped a lot.

We pay for licensing the solution. It's my understanding that it is not overly expensive. It may be somewhere around $2,000 for a license. 

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using.

I'd recommend the solution.

I would rate it at least a seven out of ten. It's a pretty good solution and we're mostly happy with it.

We primarily use Cyberoam for securing our network. We also use it for VPN.

It is not possible for anyone to enter our network until after they are able to log in, which is the most fascinating aspect for me.

The user interface is well laid out and understandable.

Sometimes, users are timed out intermittently.

We have had trouble logging into the firmware.

We have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for almost 10 years.

This is a stable product.

Cyberoam UTM is a scalable solution. Everyone on our network uses it, so it protects the whole organization. There are perhaps 300 or 400 people.

The customer support is wonderful. We only had to contact Sophos once. They helped us and it was awesome.

The first time you configure the device, you may find it complex. However, in time, you will see that it is simple. It's well laid out and fine to use. The deployment will take approximately a week.

We implemented in-house and when we experienced problems, we contacted the reseller to assist.

We paid for a two-year FullGuard license that includes support.

Cyberoam will be reaching end-of-life in two years, so we will be moving to something else. We think that if we upgrade to Sophos XG, some of the problems that we are having could go away.

Our experience with this product so far has been wonderful. Everything about it is fine and I would recommend it to everyone. That said, there is always improvement that one can make at all times.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to serve as a captive portal for staff to authenticate before they gain access to the network.

The most valuable features are the firewall section, the VPN, and how you control live users. 

The interface is good.

So far, I have not encountered any problems.

I am not happy with my last pricing experience. The pricing could be better.

I would like to see real-time alerts on traffic insights.

I have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for three years.

It's a stable product. We have not experienced any crashes or bugs.

I haven't tried to scale it yet.

I have contacted technical support once and the experience was seamless. They walked me through the right rules to create. Everything went well.

The initial setup was a bit complex. Over time, I grew and I could navigate around everywhere. It's pretty easy to find what you are looking for.

The implementation only takes a couple of hours to complete.

We used an agent to help us with the implementation.

We do all of the maintenance in-house. 

For any solution that has to pass through Sophos, we do the firewall configuration ourselves.

I am not happy with the pricing, it could be better.

We did not evaluate other solutions because we knew that we wanted to use this one.

This is a product that I could recommend to others if they had a direct contact with Sophos.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a service provider and Sophos Cyberoam UTM is one of the security products that we have experience with, in that capacity. It is primarily used for layer three gateway protection.

This is a managed service, which means that the customer does not need to purchase hardware and employ a system integrator to install it. Rather, they just have to subscribe to it. The service includes reports that we provide to the clients.

The most valuable feature is the layer three gateway protection.

Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs.

The GUI is not very user-friendly and should be improved. One of our customers had trouble with the configuration and needed somebody to help manage it for them.

The vendor needs to generally invest more in the development of this product.

The product, itself, doesn't seem to have any bugs or glitches. However, one of our customers had a lot of trouble with it because it wasn't being managed.

I have not been in contact with technical support.

We recently had a customer that was using this product, although we later persuaded them to switch to the Fortinet product, FortiGuard UTM. The suitability of Cyberoam UTM depends on the required sizing.

In summary, I don't think that Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a friendly product to work with, and I would recommend the solution by Fortinet instead.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.