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."UTM/NGFW features and FortiCloud for logs and backups are awesome."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"The inspection and web security features are most valuable."
"Good anti-malware and web filtering features."
"The most important features of Fortinet FortiGate are the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) and firewall control applications."
"Their reliability and their policy of pre-shipping replacements when a unit has failed."
"It enables our organization to become more productive. Also, it protects our NEtWare from viruses and malware."
"I like that you are able to manage FortiGate from the FortiManager to create a more centralized environment."
"It improves the availability of engineers to carry out projects."
"The most valuable feature for me is that you have just one license. You can test and implement everything you need with one license. You do not need to pay for separate module licenses when you want IPS or other features."
"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."
"This software is great in overall performance since it can locate any trouble across the networking system and provide solutions before it affects workflows."
"The most valuable features are the ease of administration with the cloud management extension and the cloud licensing model."
"The scalability is very good; again, very user-friendly. I wouldn't even say "user-friendly" because, as long as you deploy it properly, you can kill an EC2 and it will spin up another one right away, within about a minute and a half. And it will be ready for production right away."
"It was very easy to install the solution, and the architecture meant we didn't have to worry about exceeding the solution's capacity."
"The Capsule solution and application filters are the most valuable. It is pretty straightforward to implement, and it also has good stability and scalability. Their technical support is also really good."
"The most valuable features are the firewall section, the VPN, and how you control live users."
"The firewall feature has different branches, such as extended firewalls."
"SD-WAN and IPSec features are valuable to me."
"For a small-medium enterprise this solution is easy to manage and operate."
"The solution works perfectly without any users."
"The main features I have found best are the load balancer and ease of use."
"There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN."
"Web and content filtering are valuable in preventing people from abusing the network and pushing up the bandwidth price."
"It's my understanding that more of the current generation features could be brought in. There could be more integration with EDRs, for example."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"They should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"I think the only issue that needs improvement is the interface."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"The debugging and troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve the integration with Active Directory. Additionally, I would like to have a Cloud Controller, such as they do in the Cisco Meraki solution."
"While today we can manage some scopes, there are still some segments in the OSI layer we cannot manage."
"As an administrator, I can say that among all of the Check Point products I have been working with so far, the Virtual Systems solution is one of the most difficult."
"Clustering in Azure is a bit different, not using the Check Point cluster but relying on load balancing. It's not as instant as I'm used to; in Azure, it might take around half a minute to a minute, and during this time, services could be down. The delay is attributed to Azure using its load balancing mechanisms instead of the Check Point cluster."
"There is room for improvement in addressing bugs and support issues."
"The documentation has been rough. Being able to do it yourself can be hit or miss given the constraints of the documentation."
"The product can still grow."
"It's meeting our needs at this time. If I could make it better, it would be by making it more standalone. That would be beneficial to us. I say that because our current platform for virtualization is VMware. The issue isn't any fault of Check Point, it's more how the virtualization platform partners allow for that partnership and integration. There has to be close ties and partnerships between the vendors to ensure interoperability and sup-portability. There is only so far that Check Point, or any security vendor technology can go without the partnership and enablement of the virtualization platform vendor as it relies on "Service Insertion" to maintain optimal performance."
"It is somewhat problematic in the area of the cloud."
"We have had some issues with technical support, which is an area that needs improvement."
"Sometimes, users are timed out intermittently."
"Sometimes, during part of the configuration, if you don't have a lot of technical knowledge, then you may struggle a bit to configure it."
"Network visibility is an area in the solution with shortcomings where improvements can be made."
"On-box sandstorm should be available. As of now, it is from their cloud."
"The solution's pricing could be a problem for some small businesses."
"I have problems with the email filtering. Emails pass through without any filtering affecting them. When I get back to them and tell them this is the issue, they check everything and say it is not in their database signature and they have to update it. But you know, by that time, my user has already opened it."
"The reporting should be improved as well as the backup."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 119 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, Cisco Secure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos UTM, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Sophos XG. 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.