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 most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"The solution has very good threat and content filtering switches."
"The wireless control is helpful."
"The most valuable features are simplicity, management, and that it's constantly evolving."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"Easy to implement, and it is also reliable."
"The solution is extremely reliable."
"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."
"The endpoint VPN is super stable. The routing is also very good. We tried a competing product first, but we could not make it work. We came across CloudGuard. The network routing across different virtual networks in Azure and AWS was way ahead of any of the other technologies. That helped us be able to cover the whole network using one single cluster."
"The solution could improve to have a DLP feature."
"CloudGuard's intelligent tools help us automate many manual security tasks, guaranteeing our customers' environments will be secure."
"I like the tool's ability to manage cloud traffic locally without routing it through our data centers."
"I like the firewall and the virtual machine. I also like that it's compatible with Amazon Web Services and Azure."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring. We can easily monitor what kind of stuff comes over to our network and we can then check the dashboard and work accordingly."
"The security configuration features have enhanced the reliable coordination of programs and data safety."
"It is a VPN that serves all your needs as an application firewall."
"The security capabilities are okay."
"Content filtering, as this enables me to control that which employees can view at different time quotas."
"The port forwarding is good."
"The tool is stable."
"The product has helped control bandwidth utilization, as well as enhanced connectivity and security to remote locations."
"Web application filtering eases internet access control."
"Good user interface."
"It needs to improve its ISP load balancing."
"I need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"Improvement is needed in the Web Filter quotas to restrict users with allocated quotas."
"It claims it does DLP, but the degree and level of controls are very basic."
"It can be a little bit more user-friendly in terms of policy definition and implementation. It seems a little bit complicated, and it could be simplified."
"There are some complex administration tasks in their administration portal. That needs to be improved."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"The memory and hard disk capability could be strengthened."
"The challenge mainly revolves around the slower functionality of virtual IP switching in Azure Virtual Network compared to on-premise solutions. On-premise, switching between clusters is faster, taking only a few seconds, while in Azure, it can extend up to five minutes. The downtime is a concern for us."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security should give productive reports as per business requirements. It needs to improve support since the time-limit extended beyond a day. It should include more seamless API integrations."
"The product needs to improve technical support."
"I think they have pretty much mastered what can be done. There are some nuances like when you fail over from one cluster member to the other, the external IP address takes about two minutes to fail over."
"The operations require skilled manpower with extended experience of working with networking systems for better results."
"In the past year, I noticed that the challenging part, especially in the cloud, is upgrading to the next release of the firewall. Unlike on-premise upgrades, it's not as simple in the cloud. You need to recreate the machine, which makes the process more complex."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could improve by making it easier to configure."
"The setup is a bit complex, so we needed help from a consultant."
"The reporting part could be more user-friendly for troubleshooting and identifying network issues. It should be more easy for a normal user to identify the problem in their network."
"There are some issues with logs and report limitations."
"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 solution had a feature to import users from a CSV file. However, the latest version does not have that option."
"Cyberoam configuration is done through the browser, which is one of the places that viruses spread."
"Needs a mail alert/notification when the device loses any of its connections, during ISP redundancy implementation."
"The policy is a bit too vague."
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.
