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."We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"Good anti-malware and web filtering features."
"It's very easy to set up, it's very easy to make policies and, for an organization, that means you don't need IT expert in firewalls. You just need to have somebody who knows a little bit of IT, and that's it. With other products, you need someone with a "Masters" degree in firewalls."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"Whenever we raise a complaint with FortiGate, their response and resolution times are minimal."
"The multiple virtual firewalls on one box are extremely useful and the interconnection with virtual switches is simple and easy to understand."
"What's most valuable to me is that it's a contiguous solution that aligns well with the components that we've relied on and trusted from a traditional hardware, firewall, and unified threat management system. My engineers and analysts don't have to learn another platform. We have already entrusted our security controls to Check Point for perimeter and physical security, and now we can do so at the virtual layer as well, which is key to us."
"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."
"Some retail customers find the scale-up and scale-down features valuable, particularly with scale sets. This is useful for handling increased loads on devices and utilizing firewalls, similar to on-premises setups with active standby configurations."
"The tool's most valuable features for us are threat prevention, HTTPS inspection, and the Anti-Bot blade. Threat prevention helps to protect our assets from threats. HTTPS inspection ensures secure communication, and the Anti-Bot blade is particularly helpful in detecting C2 servers, enhancing our ability to identify malicious activities and protect our network."
"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."
"This software is great in overall performance since it can locate any trouble across the networking system and provide solutions before it affects workflows."
"The tool's deployment is rapid. Its dashboard is also useful. It's easy to deploy both on-premises and in Azure. In an office with VMware running, deployment is a simple process. Similarly, in Azure, deployment is easy and scalable. Adding more CPUs is a straightforward task – just shut it down, modify the security, and restart. This ease of use translates into cost and resource savings, and faster deployment times."
"We have never had to restart a firewall. The firewalls have all worked perfectly fine."
"I like the SSL VPN connection. Cyberoam works well for controlling users and authenticating their connection to the internet."
"Cyberoam UTM's most valuable feature is that it can be configured any way you like."
"Technical support is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is the IPSec forwarding."
"There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is the SD-WAN gateway."
"Scalability is one of the disadvantages. When it comes to scalability, you have to actually change the box. If you want to upgrade it, you need to actually change the existing box and probably you take the system off to other sites."
"The logging details need to be improved."
"I would like Fortinet to add more automation to FortiGate."
"Technical support for this solution can be improved."
"You do need some IT knowledge in order to effectively work with the solution."
"To some degree, it's almost a question as to why some of this stuff isn't simpler. For example, for an AP deployment, while it's integrated, the number of steps that you have to go through in order to get the AP up, seems like a lot."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the logging and reporting. Additionally, the next-generation application's policies should be improved. When they were released they had bugs."
"It can be difficult to install properly without prior training"
"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."
"Lacks the ability to integrate with other security solutions."
"Greater automation would reduce the need for manual configuration and management."
"If you compare the GUI with the Palo Alto and Forcepoint in the Cisco, they're very easy. Check Point, due to its design, is a little bit complex. They should make the GUI easy to use so that anyone can understand it easily, like Fortinet's GUI. Many companies end up using Fortinet because the GUI is very easy, and there's no need for training. They just deploy the box and do the configuration."
"The memory and hard disk capability could be strengthened."
"While today we can manage some scopes, there are still some segments in the OSI layer we cannot manage."
"The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"The VPN needs to be improved."
"The solution should improve its scalability because it cannot support enterprise networks."
"The reports need to be more detailed and granular."
"While the security features are excellent, they could be improved."
"The price is obviously a more sensitive area to focus on."
"The data support response time should be improved."
"Cyberoam configuration is done through the browser, which is one of the places that viruses spread."
"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."
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.
