Sophos XG Reviews

I use the solution in my internal network for my home office, for which I have applied a router in my home. I have deployed a couple of switches in my home network, but I need to secure my network from attacks.

Adaptive security is the most usable and most efficient feature in Sophos XG. The performance and scalability of the tool are advantageous areas.

With the firewall part in Sophos XG, it is not very flexible if you want to block access to a particular site during your internal usage. The tool is not able to block access to a particular website instantly or easily since it takes a considerable amount of time to configure a few things. If you specify that a user should not be able to go to www.google.com, it should be denied for sure.

The support engineers of the product are not very tech-savvy, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Sophos XG for four years. I am a customer of the product.

At times, there are some issues that I have faced with the stability of the product. Not many firmware updates pushed into the tool are bug-free, and because of this, I face issues.

I rate the tool's stability a seven out of ten.

It is a scalable solution.

Based on my experience with the product's support team, I feel that Sophos provides good technical support to its users.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten.

Neutral

The product's initial setup phase was easy, especially compared to Cisco.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. I have also worked with the on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in only a couple of hours.

The product has improved the security posture. Sophos XG provides features that are almost the same as those Cisco Firepower devices provide. I would say that a couple of features in Sophos XG are the same as the ones provided by other Cisco devices, which are top-notch.

The management tools or log-related solutions that are presented with Sophos are okay but not top-notch when it comes to Cisco. I rate the reporting and visibility tools in Sophos XG a six out of ten compared to Cisco.

Sophos xG's integration capabilities do not apply to a limited number of security tools. Cisco provides integration capabilities with many products, while Sophos XG offers integration with a limited number of products. Cisco provides integration capability with almost any tool that is present in the world. Cisco works day and night to ensure that it provides good integration capabilities with the solutions.

I recommend the tool to those who plan to use it, especially if you own a very small office where you don't need a product with too many functionalities.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

I use Sophos XG in my company as a firewall for my company's network. The product is used to manage the internet access received through routers for our company's network.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the routing functionality provided by the product is very easy for our company to use in our network since it provides for the movement of packets from one device to the other devices in our network, making it an area which works really fine for us.

I want an increase in the ability of the product to block and delete the websites and applications that don't work fine for our company. The tool ends up blocking another website that I need when I only want it to block a particular website or application. I can't use the product's application control feature, making it a disadvantage of the solution where improvements are required.

I have been using Sophos XG since around 2019, making it five years. I use Sophos Firewall Home Edition.

It is a very stable solution. In my company, we have had a reason to restart the product for a long time since the services offered by the tool have been fine enough for our organization.

The product was installed in our company in 2019 when we had around 15 employees. I don't see any issues with the product, considering the increase in the number of devices over the years in our company.

Sophos Firewall Home Edition doesn't provide technical support.

Sometimes, my company needs to rely on pfSense to deal with the area of backup. My company prefers pfSense to save data.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy.

I use Sophos Firewall Home Edition, which is available for free.

I haven't used the VPN capabilities provided by the product since my company already has a VPN-based solution in our environment.

The application control feature of the product is very good. My company doesn't use the application control feature for now since there was an increase in the blocking and deletion of applications when it was used.

The integration of the product into our company's infrastructure did not have any impact on our network performance. In general, the product is a bit buggy when it comes to the area of its impact on network performance.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The time taken by Sophos XG's support team to respond to and resolve an issue is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Sophos XG for four years. I use Sophos XG 210.

My company is a customer of the product.

It is a very stable solution.

The scalability of the product is okay. The users of the product in my company can use the product with all the rules and policies I have applied to the tool that made the implementation process easy.

It is easy to add more users or devices to the product.

Our company has around 300 devices on which the product is used. Our company has 50 to 60 end users of the product.

The solution's technical support is good but needs to improve in certain areas. I rate the support an eight out of ten.

Positive

Our company uses different products from Fortinet in some different locations.

Sophos XG is good for the modules it offers and if there are a large number of users. From a price perspective, Sophos XG is also good if the number of users is less.

The product's deployment process was easy.

I was the only person involved in the deployment of the product in my company.

The product can be deployed in three to four hours.

Sophos XG enhanced our company's network security and threat management since the speed and the connectivity of the VPN that it offers make it very easy to manage and don't get disconnected. When we were having CyberOne in our company, we faced some VPN connectivity issues. The VPN connectivity issue in our company was resolved with Sophos XG. With Sophos XG's username and password, users generally don't face issues related to VPN disconnection.

A scenario where Sophos XG was good for your organization stems from the fact that the performance offered by the tool is good.

The most effective feature of Sophos XG m that protects my company's network stems from the fact that it is able to protect the network by filtering out all the threats from the internet. We never faced any problems in our company's network. My company has hardly faced any problems with our computers since it hasn't been infected with any viruses for four or five years.

Sophos XG's interface facilitated our company's security management tasks since it works in an okay manner in our organization. The interface offered by the product is easy to manage since my company has three lines connected to our environment, and whenever we get a new line during which there are some disturbances, the interface allows us to manage such areas easily.

It is very easy to maintain the product.

Speaking about the cost-savings or efficiency gains from the implementation of Sophos XG, it is an okay product from a price perspective that provides the functions of a firewall.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

I primarily use the solution for managing my firewall. I'm managing my internet and my laptops in my company. I'm a personal domain controller. I'm tasked with blocking some websites with it and I'm managing my updates through it. I'm basically controlling the flow of the internet through it.

I block a lot of sites. I'm controlling the flow of the internet directed to Office 365 so that people can use it easily and fluently. They can upload and send emails easily without hassle and without accessing the internet. I'm also controlling Teams, Zoom, and other stuff for chatting online. Without this solution, I would have no control.

Content blocking for websites is the most valuable aspect of the solution. A lot of employees always want to use Facebook and other non-work-related sites. I'm always blocking that.

The initial setup is easy.

The stability is good.

Scaling is not an issue. 

The reporting needs to be much better. Sometimes I have a lot of trouble understanding what they mean.

Sometimes it misses websites. For example, websites the users shouldn't be able to enter, or sometimes these websites are not shown in this log viewer. It's just occasional misses here and there. 

Technical support could be more responsive and quicker in getting to a solution. 

I've been using the solution for at least three years now.

I have found the stability to be very good. There have been no hiccups, no restarts, nothing like that. It doesn't hang and there are barely any bugs. 

It's my understanding that they have a solution called RED, and I can upgrade it with another one to make a VPN between them. I haven't tried it yet. I'm looking at it as I have another office. I want to research scaling and have the offices together. From what I have seen, it will be easy.

Right now, we have about 50 users and 10 VPNs. That includes everyone from financial and procurement managers to the CEO, chairman, and HR department, and other operations staff.

We don't have any plans to increase users right now as we haven't increased in population, in employees number. That said, I use it a lot every day. I have to manage my firewalls through it.

In my experience, technical support takes a while to get things done. In the past, I stuck with them for a while. It took about three weeks to serve us up a solution. I don't remember what the problem was as it was a long time ago. It might have been something about the subscription or something like that. What I do remember is it took a very long time. 

I had a previous firewall, and I just swapped it out. I didn't have to change anything about my network. We previously used a firewall called MikroTik.

With MikroTik, its GUI was very bad. It's very old. Everything was manual. There were no tutorials and it was open-source. You had to search for yourself and do everything yourself. There was no support even from the company.

It was really easy for me, to be honest. The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It's not overly complex. I had a firewall before that, so I knew what to expect. The implementation was done by a company that I bought this from. They installed it for me. It took about an hour and a half, or something like that. 

I can't recall how many staff covered deployment. The deployment happened three years ago now. 

I didn't need the assistance of an integrator or reseller. 

The solution has saved me a lot of time and enhanced my workflow for my company. It enhanced employees' work time and enhanced the internet connectivity for emails. On top of that, there was no downtime with the internet. That was the basic ROI we've seen.

The subscription for this product is yearly. The last time I bought it two years ago it was about $2,000. There's just a subscription fee. There aren't any other costs. 

I also looked at Fortinet, however, from my research, I was told that Sophos had better reporting. With Fortinet, you have to buy a server to handle reporting. With Sophos, this is unnecessary. 

I'm a customer and an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. 

We use Sophos XG for ensuring security, implementing web filtering, enforcing policies, and blocking traffic as needed.

I appreciate its interface, but I find that the available ports are insufficient. I've encountered limitations, often finding that three to four ports are not adequate for our needs.

It stands out with its side-to-side VPN and SSL VPN capabilities.

The most significant aspect is the protection it offers.

I encountered an issue while implementing web filtering for users. Specifically, when attempting to access reports detailing which sites users are visiting, the diagnostic report fails to display the complete URLs of the websites visited. This becomes particularly problematic when users utilize proxy software to bypass the firewall, as it renders tracking their website visits nearly impossible. Training presents a major challenge as there are numerous features available, such as IPS and IDS, which many network administrators are unfamiliar with and tend to leave disabled. Users are unable to enable these features themselves due to their lack of understanding of their functionalities and configuration processes. The training manual provided to users lacks proper guidance on configuration procedures. The content outlined in the user manual differs significantly from the live configuration process.

I have been working with it for approximately six years.

There are several glitches in the new firewall. One particular issue arises when applying filtering settings. The firewall fails to unblock sites without requiring a restart to save and execute the changes properly.

We have a multitude of distinct sites, amounting to a total of six to seven thousand users in total.

Our experience with Fortinet was better compared to Sophos. Also, configuring Fortinet is much easier than configuring Sophos.

Installation is not straightforward; it's a bit complex. For instance, when setting up two ISP connections and terminating them on two firewalls, the process involves configuring LAN and WAN interfaces separately, along with DNS and routing configurations in different tabs. Many users may find these functions unfamiliar. It would be more convenient if all functions related to traffic routing were consolidated into a single tab for easier management. Maintenance is also challenging.

The price of Sophos in PTR is significantly higher compared to Fortinet.

Overall, I would rate it three out of ten.

Mainly as a firewall, and in some cases, as a firewall with camera surveillance integration. But primarily, it is used for firewall functionality.

I find the firewall functionality and unified threat management to be the most useful features.

The VPN has been a persistent problem for us. It's not straightforward to configure. We often encounter issues with setting up the VPN. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and we haven't been able to determine the cause.

So the VPN configuration could be less cryptic. It should be easier and more straightforward to configure. A simplified installation process and clearer instructions would be helpful. The current VPN configuration is a bit convoluted.

In additional features, it would be beneficial if Sophos XG could have an enhanced feature for aggregating bandwidth. Currently, it supports load balancing to some extent, but it would be even better if it could aggregate the bandwidth. For example, if I have multiple links, say two or three, it would be great if the solution could aggregate the bandwidth from those links. 

Ever since Sophos acquired Cyberoam. I used to use Cyberoam, and then Sophos took over Cyberoam. So I would say it's been about five to seven years since that transition happened. 

I have various versions because I'm a network service provider. I offer the high-end enterprise edition as well as the mid-range and basic versions. There are several different models available.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It is very stable. 

When deploying on-premises, if you need to scale, you have to purchase additional hardware. So, on-premises scalability would be around six out of ten. You have to size the solution for future needs.

The cloud version is much more scalable. However, when it comes to on-premises deployments, scaling can be challenging. If you need to upgrade to a higher level, you have to acquire another hardware box. So, it's not as straightforward as cloud scalability, but it's still possible, though not as easy. 

There are about 200 users. They are small and medium businesses. 

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. It required some experience in designing networks. It's not a simple "click-click-click" process; it requires the expertise of a network professional. So, if you're not experienced, it can be challenging.

It can be difficult for inexperienced users, but with the right knowledge and experience, it is manageable.

The deployment process involved acquiring the device, planning the network design, configuring it according to the desired network setup, and then connecting the necessary cables. It's a relatively straightforward process.

It only took an hour to deploy the solution.

It is fairly priced. I would rate it an eight out of ten. Mostly, I only purchase the standard license because I don't usually require the other features. It would cost approximately $2,000 on an annual basis.

Overall, my experience has been positive. I haven't encountered any major issues with it. It's easy to use and not cryptic. It's also quite stable, and I rarely experience any hangs or similar problems.

I would rate this product an eight out of ten because there is still room for improvement in VPN. 

We are primarily using Sophos XG for the identity base, policies, load balancing, and SD-WAN. Right now we have separate, different branches, therefore, we need to integrate it with SD-WAN. Of course, with SD-WAN, we need to do the load balancing, the VPN failovers, and also watch the connectivity. We are more particular on the link, and also the implementation of user policies.

The Multi-Link, or the Multi-Wan, SD-WAN, is extremely valuable to our organization.

The Anti-Spam and the Gateway Anti-Virus capabilities have been very useful.

The solution offers a very good Network Ring, QRS, and landing management. 

We've found that the reporting is very good overall.

They really work scalability into the solution at the outset.

The SD-WAN could be improved. It is not yet full-blown; it's only basic, really. They need to move on with the algorithm on how the SD-WAN works, and how it works in comparison to other brands of SD-WAN. Sophos should study those algorithms on how they do the SD-WAN to learn a few things that may help them build out their own solution.

I've been using the solution and various other Sophos solutions for a while.

If you do the right planning, most of the time Sophos is good for five years. It depends on the recommendations as well. Sometimes the Sophos team or supplier will show you the number of users or number of networks and they'll illustrate to you a plan most suited to what you have and what you might have. They assess everything and give you a five-year plan. That way, if you need to expand, they've already taken that into consideration at the outset and there's room to scale.

We have about 100 users.

Due to the pandemic, we don't really have any plans to expand. We may be downsizing a bit. We'll see.

We've been satisfied with Sophos' technical support. They are very helpful and responsive. Their staff is quite knowledgeable.

I've worked with Sophos previously and we had a different setup. In terms of implementation, sometimes there are complex setups and sometimes the setup s are more basic. Right now, we have a complex setup. We need to ensure interconnectivity between our branches. We'll have different networks, different sites, and a lot of complexity. 

It doesn't really take too long to deploy, however. The support from the supplier is good. They're always available to assist. They are well-trained and they are already familiar with the setups and configuration so they're doing a pretty good job in terms of helping us.

The supplier, the reseller, the partner of Sophos, is doing the change for the end-users. Most of the basic configuration has already been already done by us, however, for more complex areas, we could ask them, and they could come to us to configure it for us.

The pricing is based on the acquisition cost.

We have evaluated a few different solutions. We've looked at Palo Alto and FortiGate products. In terms of our end-point security, we've also looked at Trend Micro and a few others.

We are just a customer and an end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution.

ON a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at an eight.

I enjoy synchronized security, where you have to synchronize both the firewall and the endpoint. When I deploy a firewall, I integrate it with the endpoint so that they can send the security heartbeat from the endpoint to the firewall. In the Sophos firewall, there's deep inspection, which works quite well. Sophos has the web application firewall inbuilt. This is unlike other firewalls, where you have to integrate with another standalone web application firewall. Being inbuilt in Sophos, you just have to configure an application so that it's more of a policy, and you're good to go. It's pretty simple in terms of the user. 

We've deployed quite a number for our users and our customers, and the feedback is quite positive in terms of management and also administration.

The technical support is pretty good. 

The initial setup is easy.

There's quite a number of items on offer. When you look at Gartner, it's doing well. The uptake in the market has been wonderful and currently, it's competing with other top firewalls such as Check Point, Fortinet, and Palo Alto.

XG is at its end of life. People are moving to XGS. With those changes on the horizon, a client might end up in, maybe 10 years, having four or five appliances, which they might not use. I don't know what Sophos is doing to maybe change this. Right now, we've moved from XG to XGS.

Another feature, which might be good and which other vendors are maybe exploring is the NAC. Sophos doesn't have a NAC solution. 

Maybe they can improve on their WAF. Currently, they have the inbuilt. 

They could work on their SD-WAN solution. I have seen it. It's not that competitive compared to other vendors. We've had some device issues.

I've been dealing with the solution for the last four years.

In terms of when it's in the network, it's stable compared to other firewalls, where I have had some issues. I had a case with another firewall, which the client changed to Sophos and it was not that stable as the client had to go and actually restart the firewall. The challenge comes in terms of stability when, let's say, the engineer doing the scoping does the round-sizing for the firewall. This causes the IPS to become overloaded or overworked, so it disconnects the traffic at the port level. In terms of stability, I might say sometimes we might experience challenges maybe when the sizing is not done correctly. That's why we might experience that disconnect at the interface level where the internet gets disconnected, however, that's the case of sizing, not the product itself. In terms of stability, it's stable in the network.

In terms of Sophos' support, they have been wonderful. I had a device issue and I found the return policy to be quite simple. 

Their technical support is pretty straightforward. When you raise a ticket, the feedback is immediate, and you are assigned a support person. It's been a wonderful experience.

Even to the end-user, it's a pretty straightforward system that they have. A user would just log into support.id, then key in their credentials and raise a support ticket. It's pretty simple.

I'm also familiar with Check Point, FortiGate, and Palo Alto. We also used to use Sonic Wall, however, we've moved to Sophos.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not overly complex.

I've compared Check Point, CloudGen Network Security, and Sophos XG previously for clients. Not being biased to any vendor, normally, in this region, what normally happens is the budget. You might recommend Check Point to a customer, however, Check Point is a bit expensive, so you might end up losing the deal. What you would recommend, is Check Point as the Quantum, as the firewall. Sophos is doing quite well in terms of the endpoint for the workstations and the servers, the physical and the virtual. Likely it would be a good idea to recommend Sophos Security. That said, if the client has the budget, you'd recommend Check Point as a firewall. It's always good to do a bit of comparison and advise the client as to what is best for them.

We've actually deployed and supported quite a number of the products, from XG105 to XG3430.

Sophos is on-prem mostly, however, now there's another product for Sophos, for the endpoints, which is cloud-based.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's one of the best products. We have deployed quite a number of them - almost 20 - and I've not seen any of my clients complain.