We performed a comparison between McAfee Firewall Enterprise MFE [EOL] and Sophos Cyberoam UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The main benefit is the grouping of our security monitoring."
"It is a one box solution, which covers most of the edge device’s requirements."
"Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"The Intrusion Prevention System and the web filtering are both working well."
"We've found the solution to be pretty stable."
"Layer-3 firewall and routing are the most valuable features."
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"The performance is good."
"It does give certain protection for everything that is well configured on our McAfee server. We have good protection with it. If we could find a feature and make it work, it would work perfectly, there would be no bugs, and it would be really good."
"The solution works perfectly without any users."
"The tool is stable."
"The product has helped control bandwidth utilization, as well as enhanced connectivity and security to remote locations."
"The most valuable feature is the IPSec forwarding."
"User and network policies to be managed on a single screen with powerful filtering and search options."
"We have never had to restart a firewall. The firewalls have all worked perfectly fine."
"It is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support."
"It needs more available central management."
"Lacks training for new features."
"The visibility of the network can be better. The GUI can be improved for better visibility of the network flow. Other solutions have better GUI in terms of network visibility."
"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."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"To the best of my knowledge, Fortinet does not have a CASB solution and Fortinet does not have a Zero trust solution."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"Maybe they could make some features more accessible, such as a way to translate directions between two networks that share the same subnets."
"Customer support and AV are both lacking and are really hard to come to you when the product is installed. Those are the two major points that they need to work on."
"We use different workarounds and find different solutions for it, depending on the client's needs. We shouldn't have to, we should just be able to use the product as it comes with Cyberoam, rather than having to revert to other products."
"The product’s pricing has increased by approximately 45% in four months. This particular area needs improvement."
"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."
"SD-WAN should be included in the tool."
"The product fails to provide proper reports, making it an area where improvements are required."
"I would like to see improvements in the development of reports. The process needs to be made simple."
"The solution should improve its scalability because it cannot support enterprise networks."
"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."
Earn 20 points
McAfee Firewall Enterprise MFE [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. McAfee Firewall Enterprise MFE [EOL] is rated 7.0, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of McAfee Firewall Enterprise MFE [EOL] writes "For managing multiple MFE firewalls it is incredibly handy but it could be easier for customers to migrate from one version to another. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". McAfee Firewall Enterprise MFE [EOL] is most compared with , 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 list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.