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."Fortinet has a very good solution for Secure SD-WAN. One very good feature is that they have robust and simple FortiOS through which they provide all solutions. That's their strength. There's not much complexity involved with the Secure SD-WAN solution of Fortinet as compared to Cisco's solution, which has a lot of flexibility but complexity also comes with that flexibility."
"The features that prevent internet connections, the filtering are the most valuable because we did not have any internet protection before."
"I have found Fortinet FortiGate to be scalable."
"Initial setup is straightforward. There weren't too many issues with setting it up. It takes one hour or so."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"We are a visual effects company, and there have been a number of high profile security issues in our industry. This has brought us to a higher standard of security, which our clients are very keen on these days."
"We purchased Fortinet because of the pricing, its functionality, because it met our requirements, and the total cost of ownership over five years was quite reasonable. In the market, Fortinet is rated quite well."
"This is an easy solution to deploy."
"I like the tool's ability to manage cloud traffic locally without routing it through our data centers."
"The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support."
"The product has allowed us to develop applications from the cloud - even with large environments and well-segmented security lines."
"It's possible to sync the Check Point Management with the cloud portal, therefore allowing automated rules to be set in place whenever creating a new VM."
"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."
"It offers remarkable flexibility in how we configure and utilize the resources."
"Our clients choose CloudGuard as a natural progression of their solutions. They understand Microsoft and CloudGuard fits."
"The ease of deployment has been nice. It is like managing any of our on-prem firewalls."
"The product is a simple and user-friendly UTM that can handle accounting, reporting, firewall, IPS, and antivirus for industries."
"The solution's web filtering is an important feature for us in our company."
"Cyberoam UTM's most valuable feature is that it can be configured any way you like."
"The firewall feature has different branches, such as extended firewalls."
"Content filtering, as this enables me to control that which employees can view at different time quotas."
"The port forwarding is good."
"The product is worth the investment."
"The best feature is the flexibility the product offers, in terms of remote access. What we had before was a decentralized mechanism in our organization, but after having this product we were able to get the remote locations into the same LAN. We were able to control the bandwidth and were able to take virtual access of those machines and give them the support, as and when required."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"Its filtering is sometimes too precise or strict. We sometimes have to bypass and authorize some of the sites, but they get blocked. We know that they are trusted sites, but they are blocked, and we don't know why."
"I think that the infrastructure for the VPN could be improved. The way that it is bundled also made it difficult to use and sell as it is too expensive."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"I'm not sure if it's something that they already have or are developing something, however, we need some dedicated features for container security."
"The support is the main thing that needs to be improved."
"There is room for improvement regarding the technical support provided."
"The solution needs to improve the interruptions that happen during gateway upgrades."
"I think they have pretty much mastered what can be done. There are some nuances like when you fail over from one cluster member to the other, the external IP address takes about two minutes to fail over."
"The solution needs to support more hypervisors."
"CloudGuard functions just like any other firewall. It functions very well. The only thing that could maybe be improved would be to integrate some tools that are not integrated with the SmartConsole, like the SmartView Monitor that we need to open on a different application to access."
"The product can still grow."
"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."
"New features have been introduced recently, but they have not yet been integrated into CloudGuard Vsec."
"The solution's pricing could be a problem for some small businesses."
"The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing."
"Smaller CR15 units don’t have a hard disc or built in IView software. These units could do with that feature."
"The policy is a bit too vague."
"On-box sandstorm should be available. As of now, it is from their cloud."
"The solution had a feature to import users from a CSV file. However, the latest version does not have that option."
"We have had some issues with technical support, which is an area that needs improvement."
"It should have a better VPN client. We decided to find something different than Cyberoam because of the VPN client software. It would be nice to have a user interface not only in English but also in different languages."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 117 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 Untangle NG Firewall. 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.
