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."From the firewall perspective, the rules and policies are very sufficient and easy to use."
"The interface is very good."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"FortiGate firewalls are easy to manage through a user-friendly web interface. They also have advanced features like DDoS and DLP. However, I wouldn't recommend enabling all of these features on one device because it can cause performance issues."
"Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"The reporting and monitoring are very good."
"The stability of the solution is excellent, as it is with other Fortinet products."
"This product is definitely scalable."
"The tool's most valuable features are the REST APIs that help to automate the deployment and maintenance process. It helps us to reduce time to 15-25 minutes compared to the manual process which used to take around two to three hours."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized dashboard, which is used for managing all of the Check Point Security Gateways."
"Now, we can filter which websites users can access and block categories that are a risk. For example, we can block social media and gambling sites. This has helped to decrease the risk of access to malicious content on the internet."
"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 central management feature is a big plus, allowing us to manage both local and cloud gateways from one platform."
"When browsing, it scans sites to ensure that they are safe and that no harm can be caused."
"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."
"Our clients choose CloudGuard as a natural progression of their solutions. They understand Microsoft and CloudGuard fits."
"I found that the best feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is reporting. Its reporting feature is excellent, fast, and easy to prep and launch."
"I like Sophos Cyberoam UTM as a security component or device for organizations. Performance-wise, it's a satisfactory solution, and it works okay. It also has good features."
"The solution is excellent for web and application filtering and remote access with the VPN."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support."
"For a small-medium enterprise this solution is easy to manage and operate."
"Technical support is excellent."
"In some circumstances, the malware functionality is the most important feature, and in other cases, some other features."
"Cyberoam UTM's most valuable feature is that it can be configured any way you like."
"I feel that the reporting needs to be improved."
"The integration with third-party tools may be something that they should work on."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"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."
"They need faster serviceability and more security features."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"There is room for improvement regarding the technical support provided."
"There are some usability issues we'd like to see improved."
"It is a very expensive program and there are additional costs despite the standard licensing fees."
"CloudGuard Network Security's pricing is expensive. We have encountered issues with its licensing."
"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."
"This application can be more integrated with web application firewalls. Better integrations would provide more granularity, which would be helpful for focusing on the application itself and preventing attacks. It would be good to include the cross-domain search. If you have multiple firewalls that are managed on the same platform and you want to check who is using some particular objects or where a specific ID is being used, it should provide an option for this kind of search instead of having to check one by one on each firewall."
"It can be difficult to install properly without prior training"
"Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware."
"There is a lot or room for improvement, because it is still not a fourth or fifth generation firewall. It lacks security features."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"It is not a scalable product. This is because if you want to increase the capacity of the solution, then you have to change the device."
"Its scalability is not that great."
"The product’s pricing has increased by approximately 45% in four months. This particular area needs improvement."
"Maybe network traffic analysis for malware and malicious behavior."
"Needs a mail alert/notification when the device loses any of its connections, during ISP redundancy implementation."
"The technical support response time could be faster."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 117 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 Untangle NG Firewall. 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.
