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."It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"FortiGate firewalls are user-friendly, and I like the security profiling features."
"We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"We use the FortiGate Sandbox to detect zero-day vulnerabilities, such as anomalies or malware, that are unknown and have not yet been discovered."
"It is a safe product."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and there are several operating systems that can include the hardware capacities. In the newer releases, the resources were more useful because they were included in the operating system."
"Centralized monitoring, policy management, and virtualized appliances allow us to take control over our public and private infrastructure."
"Initial setup is straightforward. There weren't too many issues with setting it up. It takes one hour or so."
"SSL/TLS traffic inspection features are used for advanced threat prevention against secure SSL traffic."
"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."
"It is dynamic and agile, and its features and utilities continuously improve and evolve."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has a beautiful threat emulation different from the market."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is the increased mail protection including spam."
"The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support."
"The notifications, the visibility, and the deployment are the most valuable. It could be packaged in such a way that it took a lot of time and resources off our hands, so it was more efficient."
"I like how straightforward it is and simple it is to implement in the cloud."
"The solution is easy to integrate."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The VPN is excellent on the solution."
"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."
"The user interface is well laid out and understandable."
"We have never had to restart a firewall. The firewalls have all worked perfectly fine."
"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 most valuable feature of this product is the threat protection."
"Currently, without the additional reporting module, we only have access to basic reporting."
"In terms of what could be improved, the SD-WAN is quite difficult, because if you install the new box, 15 is okay, but if you change from an old configuration, if there is already configuration and a policy when you change to SD-WAN, you must change the whole policy that you see in the interface."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"Backup can be improved."
"The user interface could be improved."
"There is room for improvement related to the logging and reporting aspect."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"They should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"The initial setup is difficult. It took me three tries to get it right. The setup took two or three hours."
"Check Point Virtual Systems is a complete solution, but pricing can be better."
"There are some usability issues we'd like to see improved."
"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."
"Having a web UI in the VSX (or something similar) would be nice."
"The API integration is complex, which is an area that should be improved."
"The memory and hard disk capability could be strengthened."
"It needs to cover additional kinds of infrastructure, like containers and serverless options. It's somewhat limited in that area."
"Its scalability is not that great."
"Cyberoam configuration is done through the browser, which is one of the places that viruses spread."
"The technical support response time could be faster."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM has room for improvement in specific rules-based objects and redesign. The solution also needs to improve in adding rules and policies, including renewing and finding policies."
"I have problems with the email filtering. Emails pass through without any filtering affecting them. When I get back to them and tell them this is the issue, they check everything and say it is not in their database signature and they have to update it. But you know, by that time, my user has already opened it."
"The configuration requires an expert to be set up, so it could be made simpler."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"The reporting should be improved as well as the backup."
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.