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 FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"The notable features that I have found most valuable are that it includes the antivirus, and also IPS, and even SD-WAN."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"LinkGreat firewall capabilities"
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"The tool's most valuable features are IPS and blades. These features are valuable for security."
"A unique architecture makes this product stand out from other solutions."
"I like how straightforward it is and simple it is to implement in the cloud."
"The query feature is going to be a game-changer for us as we move forward."
"The ease of deployment has been nice. It is like managing any of our on-prem firewalls."
"The security configuration features have enhanced the reliable coordination of programs and data safety."
"The easy management of the policies is great for us because we are a small team and having easy management is great and useful for us."
"The tool's most valuable features are the REST APIs that help to automate the deployment and maintenance process. It helps us to reduce time to 15-25 minutes compared to the manual process which used to take around two to three hours."
"The main features I have found best are the load balancer and ease of use."
"Good user interface."
"Web Filtering and Application Filtering saves a lot of my bandwidth and improves the user's productivity."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"I find Sophos Cyberoam UTM very good. I like the feature of being able to block off Mac IDs that host users. For example, you have a Mac or Windows laptop and you created a hotspot. Other devices like mobiles and tablets e.g. iPads connected to that hotspot. We can block those devices that connected to the hotspot we created, only through Sophos. It's a good feature we didn't find in other UTMs."
"You can geofence yourself if there is an incoming attack or a continuous ping from a company outside your country."
"I found that the best feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is reporting. Its reporting feature is excellent, fast, and easy to prep and launch."
"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 initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"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."
"We'd like more management across other integrations."
"The initial setup is complex."
"This product could be improved with Active directory integration and better handling in IPsec and GRE Tunnels."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"There were quite a few problems with the stability of the system."
"The routing capability on the FortiGate devices has room for improvement."
"The solution lacks the capability to scale effectively."
"There is room for improvement regarding the technical support provided."
"I want the upgrades of their CloudGuard solution to major versions to be easier. We have had a few small hiccups. They have different types of cloud clusters called Geo Clusters, and those just cannot be upgraded past a certain point, which is a hurdle that we are currently experiencing."
"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 stability of the solution could be improved, but this is the problem of all the solutions in the market. This isn't just a problem specific to Check Point."
"In the next release, including VRF support would be highly beneficial."
"CloudGuard Network Security's pricing is expensive. We have encountered issues with its licensing."
"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."
"Maybe network traffic analysis for malware and malicious behavior."
"Cyberoam configuration is done through the browser, which is one of the places that viruses spread."
"We use different workarounds and find different solutions for it, depending on the client's needs. We shouldn't have to, we should just be able to use the product as it comes with Cyberoam, rather than having to revert to other products."
"The documentation is not straightforward."
"The product strategy of the manufacturer is strange. I don't understand what they are doing in that regard."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"The product is at its end-of-life. There is nothing to improve as it will be discontinued."
"On-box sandstorm should be available. As of now, it is from their cloud."
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.