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 most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"The most valuable feature is the policy routing and application control."
"Its user interface is good, and it is always working fine."
"The interface is very good."
"The most important features of Fortinet FortiGate are the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) and firewall control applications."
"The stability and scalability of this solution are satisfactory. Its SD-WAN, VPN, and URL filtering features are very useful."
"Security management tool that's easy to integrate and easy to work with. No issues found with its stability and scalability."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring. We can easily monitor what kind of stuff comes over to our network and we can then check the dashboard and work accordingly."
"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 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."
"The tool's deployment is rapid. Its dashboard is also useful. It's easy to deploy both on-premises and in Azure. In an office with VMware running, deployment is a simple process. Similarly, in Azure, deployment is easy and scalable. Adding more CPUs is a straightforward task – just shut it down, modify the security, and restart. This ease of use translates into cost and resource savings, and faster deployment times."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can start off with a simple firewall and expand it to UTM."
"It really is a pretty complete solution."
"Workflows across the company ecosystem have can flow smoothly without experiencing any challenges."
"The multiple virtual firewalls on one box are extremely useful and the interconnection with virtual switches is simple and easy to understand."
"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."
"The port forwarding is good."
"We are using it as a security shield. It does not allow access before that in case we have restricted a few things from users, so it helps me in that."
"The most valuable feature is the IPSec forwarding."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is the SD-WAN gateway."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The VPN is excellent on the solution."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"They need faster serviceability and more security features."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"The licensing structure is unclear, so a transparent and flexible licensing structure would be preferable."
"The solution's integration with cloud providers has seen significant development in the past months, but there is room for improvement for better integration."
"Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware."
"When upgrading the firewall, the old VPC containing the firewalls needs to be destroyed. After that, a new firewall is redeployed in the setup. Additionally, there's a need to separate the routing, and the routing from the old VPC has to be recreated in the new one."
"The price of the solution could be reduced, it is expensive."
"The business and product development team should introduce a high-end feedback collection mechanism and analyze the customer requirements constructively."
"We have Microsoft CASB cloud app security and it's one of the least compatible firewalls. They really need to look at this, as both Check Point and Microsoft are major players. Why aren't they compatible? If we had Palo Alto then we wouldn't have this problem."
"Documentation might become too complex or too spread out, especially for newcomers."
"Needs a mail alert/notification when the device loses any of its connections, during ISP redundancy implementation."
"There is a lot or room for improvement, because it is still not a fourth or fifth generation firewall. It lacks security features."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing."
"While the security features are excellent, they could be improved."
"What needs improvement in Sophos Cyberoam UTM is openness in the competition among Sophos partners or any other Sophos product. Another area for improvement in the solution is pricing. It could be cheaper."
"The Traffic Discovery feature should allow administrators to disconnect unnecessary live connections."
"There are some issues with logs and report limitations."
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.
