Sophos XGS Reviews

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.

The solution is a layer 7 next-generation firewall, which we use as a firewall and router. We customize rules to help with our security.

We like the layer 7 capability. We have a couple of servers behind the XGS firewall which understands HTTP packets. The solution offers a very accurate setup, and we can use it as a kind of reverse proxy device. Based on the connected URL, we can direct traffic to different servers without a solution.

The solution is very user-friendly, and the GUI is so good that I don't have to use the CLI. This eliminates the need for typing; clicking allows me to get to what I'm looking for.

The application is a little slow; it takes five to ten seconds to respond to every click when configuring. If we need to do significant configuration, it can take a lot of time. This might be because we have a low-end machine, and it could be faster with a high-end one.

We have been working with Sophos XGS for nine months. 

The stability has always been good, we haven't encountered any issues. 

I can't speak much to the scalability as we haven't scaled the tool. I don't think it is scalable the way I have it configured, but there is a high-availability function in the menus. I don't know if the configuration is automatically transferred to new devices.

We have 600 users working behind the solution, and it is very lightweight in terms of maintenance. Sophos provides free web access, so we can go to their website and configure the firewall, which is automatically passed on to the device.

I escalated a question regarding a license issue, and they solved it very quickly, so I rate the tech support highly.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It has an old-style GUI, so we just followed the steps, and much of the setup was automatic.

We implemented via an in-house team. 

We must purchase separate web server licenses, as they are not included in the regular device license. I would rate the product an eight out of ten in terms of price. It's relatively affordable.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

For personal use, I suggest pfSense, but for business applications, Sophos is great because they have better support and offer an excellent GUI, which makes XGS very easy to operate. pfSense offers console access and is a lot more configurable, which is why I prefer it for home use.

I would advise potential customers to get a free trial license, as it offers the freedom to trial the solution to see if it has the functionality and configuration options required.

In terms of the firewall, I'm using Sophos X on everything, including the VPN, firewall, and endpoints.

Everything about the product is okay. 

I cannot single out anything specifically, as the firewall is working perfectly. The endpoint is helping me greatly and people have been able to work from home using the VPN. It has been great.

The pricing has been fine so far.

It has a pretty straightforward initial setup.

The solution's quite stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support has always been very helpful.

In terms of updates with the current technologies and current trends, which we're always exposed to, they update their databases frequently. 

It quickly detects issues. 

It is a plug-and-play system. 

Mainly, it's a cloud-based firewall for cloud-based endpoint protection. I can be able to manage my devices from anywhere without configuring all these VLANs and whatnot.

If I could host my emails using an email transfer agent, hosting it, it would be ideal.

The configurations can be a bit complex. It may be a while before you understand the configuration process.

If you do not have any experience with the product, you may struggle to set it up.

I'd like to see more integrated services from Sophos so I can handle everything from one place without a third-party. I would like to have email hosting and management integrated into Sophos XGS.

I've been using the solution for more than five years now.

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

The solution can scale. It just depends on the model we are using. For example, on an XG transit, I can add as many users as I want. On XG 105, I can only have limited users. It depends on the package.

We have more than 80 general users on the solution. We use it intermittently.

I've dealt with support several times. They were awesome. We found them to be helpful and responsive. They are quite knowledgable. 

Positive

The setup process is perfectly okay. I'm an IT administrator. It's not very difficult for me to get everything up and running. I also need to check the integration. 

I'd rate the initial setup a four out of five in terms of ease of execution. 

In terms of pricing, it's good. They've been giving us some promotions where we would pay for two years and get an extra year free. We appreciate that level of savings.

We paid for a three-year license a while ago. I can't recall the exact amount that was paid. It was likely around $12,000 or less - around $4,000 a year.

It's one of the best pricing strategies they have used. Initially, if I were paying for a year, I would pay around $5,000 or $6,000. 

It is very affordable for a small enterprise. It is very competitive.

I am looking into Sophos NAC.

We are a customer of Sophos. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The solution provides firewall protection.

The solution is easy to use and configure, once you know how to apply the policies.

The customer service response time can be improved.

I am currently using the solution.

The stability is good. I have not had any problems with it.

The scalability of the solution is good.

The customer service response time is slow and could use improvement.

The setup is straightforward if you know how to do iOS.

The cost is around $50 per endpoint, and there is a one-time purchase fee for the firewalls of $2,500, plus services. It is roughly around $4,000.

I am currently evaluating CrowdStrike. I like it better.

I give this solution seven out of ten.

If you are looking for a low-cost solution, cheaper than Cisco I recommend this solution. You should also look at Fortinet.

The performance is good. 

It is scalable.

Technical support has been helpful in general. 

The fabric solution, the access points, and the WiFi, is not being delivered to Egypt due to some regulations. It's hard to get any devices in Egypt right now.  I need one solution and one centralized interface to monitor all the switches, access points, firewalls, and everything. I found this in Fortinet. Sophos is falling short.

We'd like an interface that can monitor everything. 

The costs could be better. 

I've used the solution for two to three years. 

I can't speak to the stability, however, the performance is good. 

The solution can scale well. It's not a problem to expand it. 

We have about 400 people on the solution currently. 

Technical support is good. 

We also worked with Fortinet. While we are on Sophos right now, we're also moving again towards Fortinet. I'm waiting on the delivery right now. 

I am implementing a new public solution for access points and switches. I'm going to FortiGate since it offers a full solution, and it is already delivered to the country, Egypt. With the Sophos access points, they are not delivering regarding regulatory issues and something like that.

We do have some people on the solution that maintains it. I don't handle the initial step myself. We have a team that does it. 

Our own team can handle the initial implementation.

The pricing of Sophos is the same as Fortinet. In general, the solutions in the market are all around the same price. 

When you go to finalize the project and include another competitor, the distributor tends to give a big discount on the solution to exit to another one.

I'm a customer and end-user. 

I don't know which version of the solution we're currently on. I'm the director of the department, and therefore, I'm not working with it directly. There's a team that's working on the versions and upgrading software and so on, while handling the technical issues. 

I'm just dealing with the high level of design or decision-making.

It's not a bad solution. It's a good option and it takes a market share in Egypt. However, I like Fortinet as they have a device that's reaching in the market and the cost is not bad. They also have an impressive monitoring interface with FortiAnalyzer and FortiManager. 

I'd rate Sophos seven out of ten. 

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.

XGS' most valuable feature is ransomware protection. 

In the next release, XGS should include mobile features like two-factor authorization.

I've been using XGS for seven years.

XGS is stable.

XGS is scalable.

Sophos' technical support has degraded in the last couple of years. They seem to need to ask a lot of questions, even with simple problems, and take a long time to provide solutions.

Neutral

The initial setup is simple.

XGS' price could be lower, though it's moderately priced in the market.

I also evaluated SonicWall and FortiGate.

XGS is a perfect product for small and medium businesses. I would rate it as eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a firewall.

Sophos XGS is okay. It’s excellent for firewall purposes.

For me, the platform is stable. It's very stable. It works when it's configured. Also, when you're checking, the logs, the graph, and the graphs are easy to read.

I can also use it for other purposes. For example, it's got a DSCP from there. It can be a distribution. I can have other functions work there, so I can do a lot more than just the firewall components.

It gets easier and easier to set up.

It works. However, Sophos configurations are a bit complex. It's not very user-friendly. I don't find it user-friendly when it comes to setting up the firewalls.

The user interface for the technical admin can be better. It should be set forward to configure a firewall. if a firewall has complexities. I don't know why they did that. However, you should be able to quickly set up a rule to minimize the mistakes that a security administrator or a firewall administrator can make and configure. If not, that becomes an issue. One mistake on a firewall could result in a bridge.

It should be more straightforward. If you compare it with GFI Carrier Control Firewall, which is very straightforward, you can see why it’s helpful when it's easier.

I’ve used the solution for about three years now.

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s reliable and the performance is good.

The solution is scalable. However, it depends on the model of the physical appliance. There are virtual and physical appliances, so it depends on which one you use. Obviously, there could be a limitation on the number of interfaces you need to use since you may want to have additional services plugged in. Then, the number of ports available may only be two, and yet you actually need to have 10. Maybe you need to buy a module that plugs in; however, there could be a challenge there.

In our organization, we have three to four security administrators.

I've never spoken to technical support directly the way I've been talking to the Fortinet team. I was working with a local partner to get it set up.

In our case, since we were doing it for the first time, we took about a week to complete everything. We were doing a lot of other things and learning as we went. If I had to redo it now, it wouldn't take me a week as I know exactly what I need to do after learning over a period of time. Also, I have backups that allow me to back up and restore, so I just restore the configuration. It’s much more manageable. The first time there’s a learning curve.

We work with a partner and distributor. We are working with the sales party since it was the first time we used them. They offer us professional services.

I found the solution to be expensive. I pay close to $10,000 per year, which I find to be expensive compared to the other similar solution or equivalent solutions.

It's just that one cost, and it's an annual license. As long as my appliance is working okay, I don't need to replace it. However, it's just that. Of course, within that, there are also support services. You might have technical support costs depending on which one of the tiers you pick.

I'm a customer of Sophos.

We’re using the most up-to-date version of the solution. It’s around version 18.

A new user needs to get trained on the appliance to understand how to implement rules and fully appreciate how to work with it. It's not that straightforward. You need to understand what the different areas are. It's complex in the way the rules are set up. My colleagues in the industry have similar comments about Sophos. It’s more complicated than it looks.

I’d rate the solution a seven out of ten, mainly due to the complexity. If I make a mistake, then that firewall is of no use. It needs to be easier to set up so that it provides me or guarantees me that what I want to set up is what I've set up to secure my environment.