We performed a comparison between 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."Anti-Spam web content filterinG."
"It is a one box solution, which covers most of the edge device’s requirements."
"You can purchase switches and you don't need to do anything with them. You just put in the firewall and the switches get all the policies and rules that you already have in the firewall. With Fortinet, you just connect the FortiSwitch to the Fortinet and that's it."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a scalable solution."
"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."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"This solution made it very easy to manage our bandwidth."
"The most valuable features of the solution are SD-WAN, filtering testing applications, web filtering, and the new VPN."
"The product has allowed us to develop applications from the cloud - even with large environments and well-segmented security lines."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to run the gateways as virtual machines in our virtual data center. The tool protects the virtual data centers."
"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."
"Security effectiveness is the most valuable feature. Operational efficiency, reporting, and support are also good."
"The tool's most valuable features are inspecting internet traffic and IPS. We can manage the firewall using shared policies from a single management server."
"Advanced check prevention is a great feature that provides threat intelligence at speed."
"The capability to auto-scale in or out, depending on the resource demand is great."
"We have found the overall functionality of the product to be exactly similar to the physical product. The one good advantage is that it is cloud-based and can be deployed either as a part of a scale set or one can shut down the virtual machine and adjust the physical parameters of the virtual machine easily and bring it right back up."
"There are plenty of features that are valuable in the Sophos Cyberoam UTM. We use all the features, such as email Security, firewall rules, web server security, web devices, web protection."
"We consider the user level and control features of Sophos Cyberoam UTM to be the best."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Technical support is excellent."
"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 product has helped control bandwidth utilization, as well as enhanced connectivity and security to remote locations."
"The solution is easy to integrate."
"Content filtering, as this enables me to control that which employees can view at different time quotas."
"Fortinet needs more memory to save the log files. We need it to save the logs on the hardware and not in the cloud. I know this feature is available in FortiCloud, but if we need this log locally, it is not available."
"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."
"The security of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"The logging details need to be improved."
"A lack of integration between our data centers."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"It could use better throughput on some of the smaller boxes for the branch offices."
"Vulnerability scanning could be improved."
"Documentation might become too complex or too spread out, especially for newcomers."
"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."
"The relationship between AWS and Check Point could be better. We had issues related to the type of instance and how it interconnects with AWS or cloud-native solutions. We overcame the pain points that we had, and now, AWS is evolving in a way that will facilitate how Check Point works. Our pain points were minimized, but they were there."
"The solution is not that flexible when deploying on-prem."
"Having a web UI in the VSX (or something similar) would be nice."
"With the incorporation of a lot of AI and machine learning, they can build some sort of a matrix for low-level threats or low-level things that require attention. There can be automation of those tasks so that we don't have to take more time and effort. There should be machine learning to eliminate level-one types of tasks."
"Its architecture and user interface need improvement. The user experience for this solution also needs to be improved, particularly in implementation, management, and operations."
"The solution could improve to have a DLP feature."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM could have a more advanced reporting function."
"There is a lot or room for improvement, because it is still not a fourth or fifth generation firewall. It lacks security features."
"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 needs to be more documentation that users can access to help them understand the solution or troubleshoot as necessary."
"Technical support could be faster."
"Cyberoam configuration is done through the browser, which is one of the places that viruses spread."
"The documentation is not straightforward."
"When it comes to web filtering and application filtering, it does not contain enough signatures to determine all of the sites that need to be blocked."
CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 54 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 27 reviews. CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.4, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CloudGuard Network Security writes "Does what it is designed for and matches what we have on-prem". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "A versatile solution that comes with valuable security features like geofencing and traffic shaping". 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 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.