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."Our project needs to link two sides through the internet. One of these was in Cairo and the other in another city. We used FortiGate as the integrating solution between the two locations, i.e. the Fortinet 30E & 100E."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a scalable solution."
"The solution is extremely reliable."
"Mainly the FortiGate reporting system is very good. It guides us through all the expectations of security. Fortinet provides us all that we need for security. Also, Fortinet FortiGate is a next-generation firewall. It is much more advanced than others."
"Virtual Domains (VDOMs) are a feature that we found valuable."
"LinkGreat firewall capabilities"
"The base firewall features are quite valuable to us."
"All of the features of Fortinet FortiGate are useful and the security protection is good."
"The tool's most valuable features are threat prevention and protection mechanisms."
"All the features that we subscribe to from CloudGuard NGTP are valuable. All the threat prevention and access control features give us the network security that we expect."
"The most valuable feature is threat prevention."
"Customers appreciate the CME plugin for automatically understanding assets within the cloud. This information appears in the manager, allowing users to tag the assets and adjust policies and rules accordingly."
"The visibility is most valuable. It allows us to see all of our devices from one place, and it gives us the ability to manage push updates and things like that from one place."
"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."
"Security effectiveness is the most valuable feature. Operational efficiency, reporting, and support are also good."
"The visibility, the one-pane-of-glass which allows me to see all of my edge protection through one window and one log, is great. Monitoring everything through that one pane of glass is extremely valuable."
"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."
"The performance has been good overall."
"The dashboard is very good-looking and offers maximum features. If a customer's website has a problem, we can guide them over the phone because they can easily find the specific option on the dashboard. That's why we suggest buying Sophos."
"I like the SSL VPN connection. Cyberoam works well for controlling users and authenticating their connection to the internet."
"I'm more inclined towards the conventional firewall. So for me, I'm more geared towards the standard firewall type functionalities as well as the web application firewall because that seems to work fine."
"Its portal is user-friendly. I am able to manage the user data and access control through this device."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support."
"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."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"There are problems with the custom reporting of the unique traffic. The data is there, but it is too difficult for us to extract."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the protection, it did not prevent us from being attacked. Additionally, Fortinet FortiGate could provide more features for WAF devices. I should not have to purchase two solutions, it would be a benefit to combine these features into one solution."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"We would like to see an upgrade to the VPN feature, we are using the VPN from outside of our office and there is a limitation to 10 connections, more connections would be suitable."
"I would like reporting to be improved and should offer a lot more tools to monitor the products."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"It is somewhat problematic in the area of the cloud."
"We have the product deployed on Azure China. One crucial concern is the version limitation; unfortunately, in Azure China, we are restricted to running version R80. Our architecture has a Load Balancer, VMSS CloudGuard, etc. The duplication in this setup prevents the application from seeing the original client IP. This poses a problem for certain applications that require the original IP for login purposes. Although we managed a workaround with a different architecture involving a WAF, it is not as straightforward as the standard Azure setup."
"A threat categorization system can be added to give users the authority to define vulnerable attacks and classify areas that can threaten the workflow system."
"Improvements needed include better integration with Azure features to match on-premises capabilities."
"The initial deployment using the ARM template in Azure was straightforward, but migrating to Terraform added complexity, although we managed to make it work."
"The product needs to improve technical support."
"CheckPoint CloudGuard could be better at solving cases."
"CloudGuard Network Security could be improved in the area of upgrading in place."
"Its scalability is not that great."
"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 product strategy of the manufacturer is strange. I don't understand what they are doing in that regard."
"The product had a hang issue. We needed to reboot, recreate the image, and reconfigure the previous image because the product hanged frequently."
"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 reporting part could be more user-friendly for troubleshooting and identifying network issues. It should be more easy for a normal user to identify the problem in their network."
"Hence, it needs to be easier to configure rules using the solution."
"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 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, 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.