We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Sophos Cyberoam UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"Security management tool that's easy to integrate and easy to work with. No issues found with its stability and scalability."
"The features that we have found most valuable are the SSL VPN and the User Portal."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"Its stability is the most valuable."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"The installation process doesn't take very long."
"We consolidated from three management consoles and three clusters to only one, which is a big improvement."
"The most valuable feature I have found in CloudGuard Network Security is the flexibility to rebuild the firewall as needed."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to run the gateways as virtual machines in our virtual data center. The tool protects the virtual data centers."
"The solution has been quite stable."
"The Identity Awareness blade and dynamic tagging in Azure are valuable because they make access management automatic. Instead of manually setting up access for each new resource, it happens automatically based on the same access policy. This dynamic setup is scalable."
"The comprehensiveness of the CloudGuard’s threat prevention security is great, especially once they integrate Dome9 in the whole thing. That really ties the whole thing together, so you can tie your entire cloud environment together into one central location, which is nice. Previously, we had three or four different tools that we were trying to leverage to do the same stuff that we are able to do with CloudGuard."
"The multiple virtual firewalls on one box are extremely useful and the interconnection with virtual switches is simple and easy to understand."
"User and network policies to be managed on a single screen with powerful filtering and search options."
"The performance has been good overall."
"The most valuable features are the firewall section, the VPN, and how you control live users."
"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."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The solution's web filtering is an important feature for us in our company."
"The product is easy to maintain."
"Web application filtering eases internet access control."
"The cloud features can be improved."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"Backup can be improved."
"Due to its higher cost, Fortinet FortiGate can lead to increased operational expenses."
"I would like to see improvements with the antivirus and IPS as they are not working properly all the time."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"In future releases, I would like to see the data loss prevention (DLP) feature could scale along with the virtual machine scale sets."
"Its price is fair, but it can be more favorable."
"Sometimes, if you aren't familiar with the solution, it can be a bit complex, but it does become easier to use with time. However, every time they launch a new version, it becomes more complex and you need to take time to get familiar with all the changes. For every version that they upgrade, you need to upskill yourself."
"We miss full blade support for all blades that are compatible with the cluster. Especially notable is the lack of support for Identity Awareness in active standby environments for customers. In our setup, transitioning to Connective clusters would be preferable for maintaining connections during failover situations."
"The threat scanning system should categorize the level of threats to enhance reliable data interpretation."
"We are at the place where we are looking at better integration with the management system. We use an MDS today, and it is self-deployed. We want to get to the Smart-1 Cloud, but we do not know what that looks like today because it does not support a multi-domain setup. Smart-1 should either be able to do multi-domain or there should be some form of taking a multi-domain environment and putting it in Smart-1."
"The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"I hope that Check Point continues to improve its technical documentation regarding the Check Point CloudGuard IaaS gateway and management system."
"Hence, it needs to be easier to configure rules using the solution."
"The product needs to improve its pricing."
"Needs a mail alert/notification when the device loses any of its connections, during ISP redundancy implementation."
"The blocking needs to be improved."
"The solution had a feature to import users from a CSV file. However, the latest version does not have that option."
"The documentation is not straightforward."
"Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs."
"The price is obviously a more sensitive area to focus on."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 120 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos UTM and SonicWall NSa. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM report.
See our list of best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) 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.
