Sophos Firewall Reviews

Our primary use case for this solution is to act as the main broadband device in our data center. The XG 210 model is being used for a hospitality solution.

The main improvement for us is with our email. The email options and email security features are good. 

We have found that the simplicity of the XG 210 is its most valuable feature. There are a lot of options available for the default firewall rules, such as email and web, that are used to secure the network.

I like all of the options, but the most important thing is that it is easy to understand how to configure everything, compared to other firewalls.

We are having a lot of issues with conflicts and user sessions, and Sophos has suggested that we change the device to the XG 400.

Aside from these issues with scalability, the email security features are good, but there are not many options. We would like to know why an email is being blocked, and how we can allow delivery. It does not keep emails in the queue for delivery. It can only log whether it is delivered or not delivered. If I need more details then I have to log in using SSH to get that information.

When an email comes in from the outside it is detected. When we check the log it only tells us that it is not delivered. We would like to create an exception, but there are not many options available for this. For example, a domain space is not allowed. Only the user name can be used to do that. We need a domain-based exception for email.

Next, the XG 210 is easy to configure, but when we are looking for more details then we can only get this information through SSH. It is quite difficult. If we can get all of those details then it would help us to understand, so this needs to be improved.

There are a lot of options and it gets confusing sometimes. If they can give limited options, with more information, then it would be good for the large sites.

The product is stable, but by stable, I mean that we still have issues. The issues are more technical, which is why they suggest that we change the device to fix the problems.

Our main data center has more than seventy servers that host a web server and internal applications. This is where we use the XG 400.

We have installed the XG 210 model at a smaller data center. We have between three and four hundred users at the most. However, because we have more than three hundred sessions, the vendor has suggested that we change to the XG 400. We do not yet know if this will fix our problem.

At our remote sites, we use the XG 135 model, and we do not have many issues.

I am not sure why Sophos suggested using the XG 210 model after doing a site check, but we are facing issues and they suggested that we replace the model.

When I call, I have to wait for at least one to two hours to reach them. Sometimes they will pick up the call immediately, but most of the time they will not. I usually have to wait one hour before they pick up the phone.

When a ticket is created we have to wait three days before getting a reply from them. When they create a ticket for a critical issue, the response is delayed. This is a new device, and we expect support from Sophos. At least the partner should support the product, but the partners are always looking for money. Even if they deploy the device, for example, the XG 450, then they only offer support for one day. After that, there is no support.

We have been using the Sophos XG 135 model at our remote sites and it works.

This year we deployed the XG 210 model at our data center, but prior to this we used Barracuda. We switched because Barracuda is too expensive. The options are very limited because you have to pay for each additional option. Each one represents a different service, like ADP (Active DDoS Prevention) or firewall. In contrast, Sophos is only a single payment, so we switched even though we lost some options that we liked.

The initial setup is very easy.

Our deployment took only two to three days. The problem is that we had a lot of issues, especially with the email. The SMTP did not work, so I could not continue with the deployment. It took between fifteen and twenty days to resolve this. I do not know what they did to fix it, but we were delayed between twenty-five days and a month.

We had contacted the Sophos partner for help, but they were not able to fix our issue. After the problem was resolved I re-initiated the deployment. Only one staff member is required to maintain the solution.

Even when you purchase the product from Sophos, they ask for a separate contract for support which is on an hourly basis.

For licensing the XG 210, we paid approximately $3000 for three years. There are no additional fees on top of this.

Other than the Barracuda and the Sophos models, I did not evaluate other solutions.

Because of the problems that we are having, I cannot recommend this solution to anyone at this time.

I would rate this solution five out of ten.

We use Sophos XGS primarily for VPN and security with clients and supplies.

Sophos XGS has some rules and intelligence to scan all vulnerabilities in our network.

The most effective feature in enhancing our network security is the threat intelligence capability.

The technical support could be improved as it is currently not competent and pretty slow.

I have been working with Sophos XGS for three years.

The technical support is rated three out of ten, indicating it needs significant improvement.

Negative

The pricing of Sophos XGS is okay. It is approximately two thousand and a half per year.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to control the network and for web browsing. It provides threat protection.

It increases productivity in our company. Everything is protected.

Deployment could be easier.

I have been using Sophos XGS for three years.

I have the company we bought from Cisco, which provides technical support. If anything goes wrong, we call them for any help and support.

Positive

With Cisco, You have to buy everything separately and request many options. It's preferable to get a full bundle like Sophos offers. Sophos includes everything in one package, and any additional features are less expensive than Cisco.

It is 20% more expensive than Sophos.

The initial setup is difficult. You need to take a course to learn how to deploy Sophos. With training and hands-on experience, it’s manageable now, but setting up Sophos for the first time was time-consuming. Deploying the security and configuring the network took a lot of effort initially, but the process becomes much easier once that's done.

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

Users have distributed networks. They use it as an SD-WAN to connect the branch’s site or multiple locations. We are using RED channels or devices for branch-to-branch connectivity.

You don't need an additional subscription for IPS or an antivirus. It has an engine of antivirus applications for IPS. You have an email gateway for people who are still using on-prem exchange. Comparatively, other firewalls might need multiple subscriptions separately for each feature.

Sophos might discontinue the UTM features, as they've been promoting the newer XGS Series appliances. While the XGS offers great features like detailed logging and audit reports, it currently lacks essential functions in the UTM. For example, the XGS doesn't provide basic audit tracking for configuration changes, which is crucial for understanding who made modifications, what was changed, and when. Sophos claims they'll add this functionality later. Its absence significantly hinders the usability of the new firewall.

Additionally, while XGS offers decent day-to-day management, there's room for improvement. Many users transitioning from UTM find the XGS interface less intuitive, causing a learning curve.

I have been using Sophos XGS as a reseller for a long time. We are working with the latest version of the solution.

The newer version is stable. Earlier versions, like V8, were quite unstable.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight-point five out of ten.

The solution’s scalability is good. We cater the solution to small, medium, and enterprises.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

Support is mostly good, but sometimes it takes too long to escalate the solution.

Neutral

The initial setup is very easy. It depends based on the scale of the deployment. There are different use cases according to the customers. Based on the requirements, the deployment can take between one day to a month. We have a small customer with a few hundred users. We can configure that within two to three days and finish the deployment quickly. It requires meticulous planning, and doing it then takes time based on the size of the customer , especially if it's a big customer. A small deployment is very easy. Larger deployments take time based on the customer requirements and different timescopes of the customer and downtime.

Sophos is comparatively cheaper than other products. The total cost of ownership is better in Sophos.

I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight-point five out of ten.

We used it to create rules to monitor our network environment properly, using the standard.

It's great because we can create and manage firewall rules, add policies to those rules, and generate detailed reports. It has helped us protect our network and meet compliance requirements.

The policies are the greatest feature. They allow us to configure granular control over our network traffic.

The speed of report generation could be improved.

I have been using it for one year. I used version 16.5, and I also used version 17 of the product.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate it highly for scalability. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

I had a little bit of experience with another firewall solution, but not much.  

It is easy to deploy and manage.

The pricing is okay. 

I would recommend go ahead and use it. It's a great product. I have this product in my house as well. 

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

We use the solution to secure networks and traffic for our customers.

The solution is easy to use and provides regular updates. Along with this, it is network friendly as well. Thus, we can easily control and monitor the devices.

The solution's pricing and stability could be better.

We have been using the solution for three years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability a seven or eight. Sometimes, we encounter stability issues.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability an eight or nine. Our clients for the solution are enterprise businesses.

The solution's technical support is good.

Positive

The solution is easy to install. It takes a day or two to complete depending on the use cases. We require one technician for its deployment. Also, its maintenance process involves adding connections, managing them, and checking the errors.

We have the solution's annual license. Its price is moderate, but it could be cheaper. Also, there are additional costs involved as it requires appointing IT experts.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as seven out of ten.

The primary use case is for recommending it to my customers who are using it right now.

The feature that I find most valuable is the synchronized security option where the endpoint talks to the firewall.

Level one technical support is not good at all and needs to be improved.

I have been using Sophos XGS for the past six years or more. 

The stability is very good for Sophos XGS.

Sophos XGS is scalable. I am currently working with anywhere between five to forty users.

I was working with Fortinet before switching to Sophos XGS.

The initial setup is straightforward. The basics are easy, but it is all the extra features that take a long time to deploy.

The pricing for Sophos XGS is reasonable.

I would rate Sophos XGS an eight out of ten.

Sophos XGS's best features are its VPN and ATPR1 cert protection. It's also very user-friendly and makes managing roles and policies very easy.

There are some issues with conversion and user roles when upgrading to Cyberoam.

I've been using Sophos XGS for two years.

Sophos XGS is stable.

Sophos XGS is scalable.

Sophos's technical support is excellent.

I previously used Cyberoam, but Sophos XGS's licensing is easier.

Sophos XGS's pricing is very affordable.

I would give Sophos XGS a rating of ten out of ten.