Sophos XGS Reviews

Sophos helps us set public restrictions and add category filtering to secure the network. It provides ATS and IPS scanning for further protection.

I like the Sophos UI. It interface has a more comfortable feel than the competitors.

I recommend Sophos increase the user capacity of the firewall by 1.5 times. For example, say the firewall can accommodate 1,000 users now, then it should handle a load of 1,500 users.

We've been using Sophos XGS for seven years.

Sophos is a stable product.

Sophos XGS is scalable. My company has almost 6,000 users.

We've contacted Sophos support multiple times for help troubleshooting.

We used a Cisco firewall for four years before Sophos. My company has multiple locations, and some had Sophos, but others used Cisco. After we had a good experience with Sophos, we moved the entire company to Sophos.

Installation is pretty straightforward compared to Juniper and Cisco products. The Sophos installation offers better guidance. 

We handled the installation and configuration with our in-house team.

Sophos isn't expensive. It's a mid-range solution that's cheap but not too much cheaper than competitors. It's a good price that meets all our compliance requirements. 

I rate Sophos XGS eight out of 10. 

we are using Sophos XGS for full control over our network.

Sophos XGS has improved our organization.

The most valuable feature of Sophos XGS is its ease of use.

The price of Sophos XGS could improve, it is high.

I have been using Sophos XGS for approximately two years.

Sophos XGS is stable.

The scalability of Sophos XGS is good.

We have approximately 10 technicians that know how to use the solution.

The support from Sophos XGS was responsive. They solved the issues we had.

Positive

We have not used another solution prior to Sophos XGS.

The initial setup of Sophos XGS was easy. The time it took for us to implement the solution was approximately one month.

We use a third party with our in-house team to do the implementation. We have 10 workers that maintain the solution.

I rate the return on investment for Sophos XGS a three out of five.

There is an annual licensing fee to use Sophos XGS. It is an expensive solution.

I rate the price of Sophos XGS a four out of five.

We did not evaluate another solution before choosing Sophos XGS.

I rate Sophos XGS seven out of ten.

We use XGS as a firewall, for web filtering, and network control. I'm an IT manager. 

The VPN is the best feature because I'm working a lot from home now. 

I think the earlier SG version was easier to configure and manage. The XG is a little different and somewhat more complicated. I'd like it to be easier to manage and configure.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is stable.

Right now we're having some issues but they're related to the environment and not the solution.

The customer support is not great, it takes them too long to respond. 

Neutral

The initial setup is very easy. 

I believe we pay for licensing every three years and I think it's around $1,800 which includes the hardware. It's a reasonable price. 

I recommend this solution and rate it eight out of 10. 

In some instances, we are using it in a virtual appliance in a VMware environment.

I will not rely on Sophos to build my infrastructure. For that, I will go to Fortinet or Palo Alto. However, from an end-user management perspective and the granular control and the reporting stuff, I still prefer Sophos. 

We are using Sophos as our internet gateway for specific sites that don't have to do with the backend tunneling and the infrastructure and all that stuff.

I have found some difficulties in other products, like in Fortinet, where there is no end-user visibility in a presentable form that non-technical people can interpret. I'm talking more specifically about non-technical management. You have to present something. Apart from that, the end-user integration is fine if you are using it for NCL and or as an internet gateway. Sophos allows for more visibility.

However, as far as infrastructure is concerned, if I have to apply this as a device in my data center or at any critical point, this device fails to perform. The hardware is not up to par. Even if I answered from proxy to transparent, transparent proxy to the full proxy mode, there are some hardware difficulties.

The centralized security is very good. 

The heartbeat system, the reporting management, and the electoral control that is achieved when the Sophos XGS is integrated with the Sophos endpoint is great.

It's close to the top of the line, alongside Trend Micro in terms of security reporting.

It is easy to set up.

I have observed that there are some reliability issues with these products in regard to the hardware performance and RMS.

I've witnessed many devices go down - even three on the same day. I've never seen that, for example, with Fortinet.

The stability could be a bit better.

I would like to have a proper SD-WAN orchestration solution. They are working on it. However, it still needs some improvement. Apart from that, it would be better if they provide the email gateway and the WAF not as a feature in the existing XG but as a dedicated appliance. Barracuda and Fortinet, for example, are providing dedicated services for the WAF and email gateway. Compared to that, Sophos is not up to the same level.

I've used the solution for around five years.

While their endpoint is a stable solution, their firewall needs to be improved in regard to integration with other products. I have specifically witnessed a case where we tried to integrate Sophos XG with the DLP product by Force Point. That wasn't supported right away. FortiGate was supporting that particular model.

I would like to have scalable products, however, normally what I have witnessed is that every new product that they push out or any additional feature that they push out in a new VMware version or specifically for the firewall may have some stability issues. So scalability at the cost of stability is not an option for me.

We have about 250 to 300 users. We have multiple branches that use this product. Usually, it's the development team, and hardware and software users. 

We may expand usage. It will depend on the additional sites we may operationalize soon.

I've had some direct escalation experiences with the country manager and their technical lead. I tend to get a good response.

While in general technical support can be better sometimes, as far as their resolutions are concerned, the team is providing us with technical assistance, and their approach to resolutions can be a bit tricky. Normally they try to avoid dealing with the solution so you have to dig it out and you have to work on it yourself, or you have to push them that there must be a solution.

Neutral

I have some expertise in Sophos and Fortinet; I'm not so sure about Cisco. We are also using Palo Alto.

We had some granular control in Sophos that was a bit advantageous to us. That's why switched. Also, the reporting, AD integration and the Sophos endpoint integration were key drivers in making the change.

The solution is simple to set up. It's not overly complex. It only takes a couple of minutes. 

YOu only need one person to handle maintenance. 

I handled the initial setup myself. 

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis, and it is fine. The renewal costs are typically reasonable. If you compare the general cost to Fortinet or Palo Alto, it's lower and more affordable. YOu can also pay for extra support.

We are a Sophos end-user.

For small enterprises or even for some enterprises that do not require large infrastructure, I would recommend Sophos right away. In Pakistan, we have to present something to the management and most of the time the management of the company is non-technical. So the presentability factor and the users' granular control and integration factor, make it attractive. This product can be used as an internet gateway. I have already recommended it to multiple users not for the infrastructure but for the internet gateway or as a proxy service.

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten. Some features still need improvement or to be built out, like  proper orchestrations or dedicated services.

This solution is like our gateway to the internet. We use it for access control. 

This solution is very simple to manage. It's user-friendly and quite easy to configure. It's easy to communicate with the Sophos support team.

I would like to see a history of the monthly bandwidth utilization, the bandwidth consumption for a period of time. Right now, I know they have something where you can see the live bandwidth utilization when you go to reports. However, there is not a history where you can go back and say, "I want to see what was consumed during the last month." You can't get that history. I know there are other third-party tools that do that, but if Sophos could have it integrated into its file device, that would be cool. 

I would like to see them reduce the price.

I have had experience with this tool for about three years now.

This is a stable product. 

This solution is scalable. There are currently 250 systems connected to this solution. 

My experience with the Sophos technical team has been fantastic. I was trying to set up a VPN tunnel through a SAP X server, so I was having some challenges, and our consultant tried and then he just decided to set up an appointment with the Sophos technical team. Within a short period of time, we were able to pinpoint where the problem was coming from and we got the problem solved. I would rate the technical support as a five out of five.

Positive

The initial setup is quite easy. It's not a challenge. On a scale of one to five, where one is difficult and five is easy, I would give it a four. 

It was done in-house but we consulted a third party that is more experienced with Sophos.

The price of this solution is quite high. Currently in my country, in Nigeria, we are facing a lot of problems with products. The value of the naira and the dollar keep heating up, and it's not good for us here Nigeria, so the Sophos price is not friendly. I think the price needs to be worked on so that it can at least be commercially available to us here in Nigeria. I would rate the pricing as a three out of five.

Sophos is always my preferred solution. I've worked with Sophos, Fortinet, and MikroTik in terms of configuring VPN access to the routers. I find it very, very easy to do it on Sophos, so I prefer to use it instead of the other two solutions. 

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten.

Primarily, I use XGS for security and authentication.

Sophos XGS' most valuable features are protection and intrusion prevention detection.

Sophos XGS's response to zero-day attacks could be improved. In the next release, Sophos XGS should include signature filtering, hybrid cloud support, and the ability to scale without replacing the hardware.

I've been using Sophos XGS for four to five years.

Sophos XGS is a stable product.

Sophos XGS can scale up and down to 1,200 users, but if you want more users, you have to change the appliances too.

Sophos' technical support is good.

Positive

Sophos XGS is easy to set up if you have knowledge of the system.

Sophos XGS costs around $6,000 for a basic license.

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

Mainly, we use it as our internet gateway firewall for scanning internet traffic that comes to our network from WAN and for internet distribution such as thin client. We have a thin client environment. It also works as a distribution layer for internet users, especially in thin client environments. It scans the traffic that passes from this device.

In this solution, the most valuable feature is that it's a security device. Maintaining security is very valuable for us.

The other feature that we did not find in other products is that it works well with thin client environments.

Sometimes, we haven't received proper support. They couldn't find the solutions that we required.

One thing that we need is an NTP server facility. The Sophos XGS device does not have this capacity or this feature.

We've been using Sophos XGS for almost one year.

It's stable. We haven't had any issues with it.

I don't think it's scalable. It's a product that we bought with a specification, and we cannot improve that. We cannot upgrade; we can only upgrade its OS; nothing more.

Only the network administrator uses it, but we might set it up in another business unit next year.

I would rate technical support at six out of ten because we haven't received proper support sometimes.

Neutral

We worked with Cyberoam, and when it reached the end of life, we replaced it with Sophos.

The initial setup is easy, and I'd give it a two out of five.

Because this is a security appliance, we cannot calculate the ROI exactly. However, every time security devices work well and guard us from attacks, it is a good ROI. This device has a good ROI.

The licensing cost is in the normal range and is not very costly.

Overall, we have had a good experience with Sophos XGS and would rate it at six on a scale from one to 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.