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 features that prevent internet connections, the filtering are the most valuable because we did not have any internet protection before."
"FortiGate has a very strong unified threat management system."
"This solution has helped our organization by having strong functions and a reliable firewall."
"The solution is easy to configure and maintain remotely."
"Whenever we raise a complaint with FortiGate, their response and resolution times are minimal."
"The web tutor and automatic rules by schedule are good features."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"We use the filtering feature the most. It has filtering and inbuilt securities. We can create customized rules to define which users can access a particular type of site. We can create policies inside the firewall."
"It's possible to sync the Check Point Management with the cloud portal, therefore allowing automated rules to be set in place whenever creating a new VM."
"The security configuration features have enhanced the reliable coordination of programs and data safety."
"The solution is reliable."
"Moving into the cloud without having to change a lot of our internal processes and retrain staff is one of the biggest benefits of this solution."
"The tool's most valuable features are threat prevention and protection mechanisms."
"The 24/7 online customer support services enhance effective operations and provide quick services in case of a system failure."
"It improves the availability of engineers to carry out projects."
"When browsing, it scans sites to ensure that they are safe and that no harm can be caused."
"We have never had to restart a firewall. The firewalls have all worked perfectly fine."
"Our customers find it economical and offers good security. These two features are key. Ease of installation and implementation are also key factors."
"There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN."
"The reporting features are very good."
"Web and content filtering are valuable in preventing people from abusing the network and pushing up the bandwidth price."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is easy to integrate."
"I would like Fortinet to add more automation to FortiGate."
"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."
"There are a lot of bugs I have found in the solution and it is difficult to upgrade. These areas need improvement."
"I use the FortiGate 60D model and realized the 300Mbps bandwidth limitation. Because it is a product that offers many services, I think it could have greater bandwidth capacity."
"Backup can be improved."
"The way everything is set up could be easier. Currently, people need a lot of experience and knowledge to administer it and to link it to devices."
"The logging details need to be improved."
"They have to just improve its performance when we enable all UTM features. When you enable all the features, the performance of FortiGate, as well as of Sophos and SonicWall, goes down."
"Zero touch removes any independence for configuring."
"We did not use the AWS Transit Gateway, and that's one of the things that we're currently using. I believe we will be working with Check Point again, in the near future, to implement it, once they start having proper support for a single customer with multiple accounts. When we were using them, we had to install Check Point on each and every single account."
"In case the device is inaccessible due to some issue such as CPU or memory, there is no separate port or hardware partition provided for troubleshooting purposes."
"Improvements needed include better integration with Azure features to match on-premises capabilities."
"Sometimes, if you aren't familiar with the solution, it can be a bit complex, but it does become easier to use with time. However, every time they launch a new version, it becomes more complex and you need to take time to get familiar with all the changes. For every version that they upgrade, you need to upskill yourself."
"Lacks the ability to integrate with other security solutions."
"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."
"We are at the place where we are looking at better integration with the management system. We use an MDS today, and it is self-deployed. We want to get to the Smart-1 Cloud, but we do not know what that looks like today because it does not support a multi-domain setup. Smart-1 should either be able to do multi-domain or there should be some form of taking a multi-domain environment and putting it in Smart-1."
"The following could be improved: Web Filtering using wildcards; clarity regarding the firewall rules; granular reporting features."
"The configuration requires an expert to be set up, so it could be made simpler."
"I would say there's room for improvement in terms of the GUI. Because it is better than some of the other standard firewalls. They have the drag and drop features."
"The product strategy of the manufacturer is strange. I don't understand what they are doing in that regard."
"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."
"Cyberoam configuration is done through the browser, which is one of the places that viruses spread."
"Sometimes, users are timed out intermittently."
"The blocking needs to be improved."
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.