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 threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"It is a safe product."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the FortiManager for centralized management."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"It improves the availability of engineers to carry out projects."
"The query feature is going to be a game-changer for us as we move forward."
"The comprehensiveness of the CloudGuard’s threat prevention security is great, especially once they integrate Dome9 in the whole thing. That really ties the whole thing together, so you can tie your entire cloud environment together into one central location, which is nice. Previously, we had three or four different tools that we were trying to leverage to do the same stuff that we are able to do with CloudGuard."
"We find all the features valuable, particularly the firewall, application control, URL filtering, and HTTPS detection."
"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 ease of administration with the cloud management extension and the cloud licensing model is valuable."
"This solution brings us closer to having a better security score, which helps us a lot in complying with information regulations based on security."
"The central management feature is a big plus, allowing us to manage both local and cloud gateways from one platform."
"The product is worth the investment."
"The solution's interface is user-friendly, and the web protection is good. The tool is highly stable. The product is scalable. The technical support is good. We chose Sophos Cyberoam UTM because their focus on security research is higher compared to other brands. It's an all-in-one solution with antivirus, EDR, wireless protection, and web protection integrated into one box. The initial setup was straightforward."
"The product is easy to maintain."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support."
"The most valuable feature is the IPSec forwarding."
"The product is a simple and user-friendly UTM that can handle accounting, reporting, firewall, IPS, and antivirus for industries."
"The product has helped control bandwidth utilization, as well as enhanced connectivity and security to remote locations."
"I like Sophos Cyberoam UTM as a security component or device for organizations. Performance-wise, it's a satisfactory solution, and it works okay. It also has good features."
"It could use more templates for third-party site-to-site VPN setups other than FortiGate and Cisco."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"We were not able to build a full-mesh VPN; however, I am not sure if this was the fault of Fortinet FortiGate."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"I don't like that anything more than very basic reporting is not included."
"It claims it does DLP, but the degree and level of controls are very basic."
"I think they need to improve more in order to be a competitor with the leaders of the field."
"They need faster serviceability and more security features."
"There is room for improvement in addressing bugs and support issues."
"They are coming out with more SD-WAN express route support from a firewall perspective. That would be great."
"Check Point has a history of moving fast with software release and upgrade cycles which are difficult to keep up with at times."
"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."
"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 management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"The connection to the on-premises management requires using the CLI. It's not just a click, and you cannot edit in the management to prepare everything. You need to do it online and in real time. After that, you must execute a script, and then you should be happy that it appears in the management."
"The user experience might suffer if we don't have the time to follow up with our clients and ensure they are using the right options. Clients also want more local support in Portuguese and Spanish during their normal business hours. That's something I hear from my customers and my team, too."
"I would like to see improvements in the development of reports. The process needs to be made simple."
"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."
"VPN configuration is not very swift."
"The configuration requires an expert to be set up, so it could be made simpler."
"There is a lot or room for improvement, because it is still not a fourth or fifth generation firewall. It lacks security features."
"The VPN is an area that can be improved."
"Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs."
"The data support response time should be improved."
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.