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."The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"The security features that they have are quite good. On top of that, their licensing model is quite nice where they don't charge you anything for the SD-WAN functionality for the firewall."
"The most valuable feature of FortiGate is FortiView which provides proactive monitoring."
"All of the features of Fortinet FortiGate are useful and the security protection is good."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"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."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"The versatility is the solution's most valuable feature."
"We find Check Point valuable because they are 100% focused on security. It totally closes the potential vulnerability channel. We can check our mail and our attachments and we can scan everything easily. We get an immediate report about the situation of the attachments. We can discover if the target's security attack was started from phishing, etc. We also enjoy using the additional features that protect our internal customer from targeted attacks."
"It is dynamic and agile, and its features and utilities continuously improve and evolve."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can start off with a simple firewall and expand it to UTM."
"Check Point CloudGuard technical support is good."
"The solution is easier to manage than an on-premise firewall. It is easy to manage. The use of dynamic objects for these gateways made it easy to create the right rules and the right policies. Integration with Azure is also easy where we have to just add the subnets. In an on-premise setup, we have to add everything from scratch. We can automate a lot of actions."
"Auto Scaling is one of the features that make me want to choose CloudGuard over actual HW."
"The tool's most valuable features are IPS and blades. These features are valuable for security."
"The firewall feature has different branches, such as extended firewalls."
"The main features I have found best are the load balancer and ease of use."
"Our customers find it economical and offers good security. These two features are key. Ease of installation and implementation are also key factors."
"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 solution is easy to integrate."
"The solution has good load balancers."
"You can geofence yourself if there is an incoming attack or a continuous ping from a company outside your country."
"We consider the user level and control features of Sophos Cyberoam UTM to be the best."
"In the next release, I would like to see the interface simplified to be more user-friendly."
"I don't really have anything negative to say as far as Fortinet firewalls are concerned. If anything, they can support a user a little bit better. They can stop being so time-sensitive about how much time the support call has taken, and they can help you do it yourself."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"The feature which gives us a lot of pain is ASIC architecture."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"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."
"In the future, I would like to see improvements made to cloud-based management."
"We utilize logging systems, and geolocation is crucial for us as some applications must only be accessible from our country. However, there have been occasional issues with this feature."
"The documentation has been rough. Being able to do it yourself can be hit or miss given the constraints of the documentation."
"For major upgrades, it's still necessary to destroy the VMs and re-create them again. Doing that would mean new public IPs as well."
"In the next release, including VRF support would be highly beneficial."
"Check Point CloudGuard is not a feature-centric product because Check Point concentrates on security."
"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."
"At the cost level, the solution is somewhat expensive."
"The product needs to improve technical support."
"It should have better VPN protection. Some of the VPN applications are not blocked by this firewall. Some VPNs are able to get through this firewall, which is why I am planning to replace this firewall with a good one in the near future."
"There is a lot or room for improvement, because it is still not a fourth or fifth generation firewall. It lacks security features."
"I would like to see a better content management pack and also the website searching should be better."
"I don't know whether this will be included in an upgrade, but I would like to get the user utility, like seeing where the users are using more of the data."
"The solution had a feature to import users from a CSV file. However, the latest version does not have that option."
"It is not a scalable product. This is because if you want to increase the capacity of the solution, then you have to change the device."
"The price is obviously a more sensitive area to focus on."
"The product strategy of the manufacturer is strange. I don't understand what they are doing in that regard."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 112 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, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, 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.