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 initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"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."
"FortiGate SD-WAN facilitated a smooth transition for our customers between their two internet service providers, ensuring uninterrupted connectivity without any downtime."
"The SD-WAN is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The most valuable feature is the SSL VPN, as it allows us to connect and it separates this product from other firewalls."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"We can use our devices to check all of the perimeters. It secures email websites."
"It is a good-to-use tool that is also flexible."
"The CloudGuard Network Security's most valuable feature is implementing IPS for accessing our data center and server environment in Azure. It helps us to prevent attacks. By protecting our environment with Check Point, which we were already familiar with, it provided a solution that extended into the cloud environment."
"One of the main characteristics that Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has given us is granularity and visibility."
"CloudGuard's intelligent tools help us automate many manual security tasks, guaranteeing our customers' environments will be secure."
"It really is a pretty complete solution."
"The versatility is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature for us is the simplicity of creating this environment. Even though our current cloud usage is limited, the process of setting up machines in the product and establishing an HR system was straightforward."
"It is scalable. It's a cloud solution, so it's easy to implement and manage."
"The performance has been good overall."
"Good user interface."
"The most valuable features are the firewall section, the VPN, and how you control live users."
"SD-WAN and IPSec features are valuable to me."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support."
"Web and content filtering are valuable in preventing people from abusing the network and pushing up the bandwidth price."
"The VPN is excellent on the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is the SD-WAN gateway."
"The reports are very basic."
"Price, of course, can always be more competitive or better."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"WAN load-balancing could be a lot better at detecting when a link is poor or inconsistent, and not just flat out dead."
"The performance and speed are aspects of the solution that could always be improved upon."
"Improvement is needed in the Web Filter quotas to restrict users with allocated quotas."
"The debugging and troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"The inability to scale the FortiAnalyzer to match our growth necessitates the purchase of new hardware."
"Check Point support, beyond CloudGuard, does need some improvement."
"The licensing structure is unclear, so a transparent and flexible licensing structure would be preferable."
"When upgrading the firewall, the old VPC containing the firewalls needs to be destroyed. After that, a new firewall is redeployed in the setup. Additionally, there's a need to separate the routing, and the routing from the old VPC has to be recreated in the new one."
"The convergence time between cluster members is still not perfect. It's far away from what we get in traditional appliances. If a company wants to move mission-critical applications for an environment to the cloud, it somehow has to accept that it could have downtime of up to 40 seconds, until cluster members switch virtual IP addresses between themselves and start accepting the traffic. That is a little bit too high in my opinion. It's not fully Check Point's fault, because it's a hybrid mechanism with AWS. The blame is 50/50."
"The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"People don't know about the tool's features. There's a lack of skill. Users require more knowledge on how to integrate it into the cloud environment and orchestrate routing. So, it's not necessarily a CloudGuard Network Security or Check Point issue but more about integration, knowledge, and understanding."
"We utilize logging systems, and geolocation is crucial for us as some applications must only be accessible from our country. However, there have been occasional issues with this feature."
"The costs are high."
"Once in a while, an unwanted email will slip in. You have to set your parameters to avoid that happening, but once in a while, an email has slipped past firewall. Once you update the firmware, you notice that it doesn't happen. If an email slips in, I get a little bit worried. I do get the report, but you just don't want that situation happening in the first place."
"The product had a hang issue. We needed to reboot, recreate the image, and reconfigure the previous image because the product hanged frequently."
"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."
"The product’s pricing has increased by approximately 45% in four months. This particular area needs improvement."
"I had an issue when I was trying to stop a user from using too much bandwidth while I was using Azure, I was not able to stop them."
"Technical support could be faster."
"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."
"Its scalability is not that great."
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.