We performed a comparison between Netgate pfSense and Sophos Cyberoam UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The virtual firewall feature is the most valuable. We have around 1,500 firewalls. We did not buy individual hardware, and the virtual firewalls made sense because we don't have to keep on buying the hardware. FortiGate is easier to use as compared to Checkpoint devices. It is user friendly and has a good UI. You don't need much expertise to work on this firewall. You don't need to worry much about DCLA, commands, and things like that."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the APIs. They are the most widely known."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"It is a safe product."
"Customers want to load balance more than eight lines or six internet lines. FortiGate is the only solution that can accomplish this."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the analytics."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"This solution has helped our organization by protecting our network from attacks."
"The gain in performance and security from configuring the VPN connections was significant."
"It is a good firewall with good performance."
"Improved service performance and availability through redundancy."
"For everyday tasks, we just get alerts. It's anything that's suspicious, including from our Netgate. So, it's part of how we maintain cybersecurity in our school. This is working alongside our endpoint security solution."
"The most valuable feature, for instance, is the ease of migrating configurations between different Netgate devices housed in the same box."
"I can manage it easily by myself."
"It is easy to use and has integrity with other systems, such as proxies and quality of service."
"The solution's web filtering is an important feature for us in our company."
"The security capabilities are okay."
"The firewall feature has different branches, such as extended firewalls."
"The product has helped control bandwidth utilization, as well as enhanced connectivity and security to remote locations."
"Cyberoam UTM's most valuable feature is that it can be configured any way you like."
"The tool is stable."
"Bandwidth Management and aggregation. It is valuable for combining two ISPs. Switching to a secondary/redundant ISP is thus seamless, in the event that the primary ISP goes down. The Bandwidth Management is also valuable for limiting heavy downloaders that may impact negatively on the experience of other users."
"It is very easy to use."
"The graphical user interface of Fortinet's FortiGate product does not function well with text-based interfaces."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"The price of FortiGate should be reduced because there are some other leading products that are cheaper."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"Fortinet could improve the windows opener or the virtual IP solutions for opening windows. The virtual IP settings need improvement as firewalls are trending in new development directions."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"The scalability could be better."
"The product could offer more integrated plugins."
"It needs better parsing of logs. At the moment, you have to use an external server for this if you want a deeper analysis."
"I would like to see SD1 integration into the software. That would be fantastic."
"I would like to see multiple DNS servers running on individual interfaces."
"It was difficult to configure our web printer through the solution. This process could be easier. Additionally, integration with SD-WAN solution."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me."
"I'd like to find something in pfSense that is more specific to URL filtering. We have customers who would like to filter their web traffic. They would like to be able to say to their employees, "You can surf the web, but you cannot get access to Facebook or other social media," or "You can surf the web, but you're not allowed to gamble or watch porn on the web." My technicians say that doing this kind of stuff with pfSense nowadays is not easy. They can implement some filters using IP addresses but not by using the names of the domains and categories. So, we are not able to exclude some categories from the allowed traffic, such as porn, gambling, etc. To do that, we have to use another product and another web filter that uses DNS. I know that there are some third-party products that could work with pfSense, but I'd like the native pfSense solution to do that."
"Smaller CR15 units don’t have a hard disc or built in IView software. These units could do with that feature."
"There are some issues with logs and report limitations."
"Once in a while, an unwanted email will slip in. You have to set your parameters to avoid that happening, but once in a while, an email has slipped past firewall. Once you update the firmware, you notice that it doesn't happen. If an email slips in, I get a little bit worried. I do get the report, but you just don't want that situation happening in the first place."
"The documentation is not straightforward."
"Its scalability is not that great."
"The solution should improve its scalability because it cannot support enterprise networks."
"It isn't missing anything."
"The product fails to provide proper reports, making it an area where improvements are required."
Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 9th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos UTM, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos XG and OPNsense. See our Netgate pfSense vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
