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 solution is stable."
"The solution is easy to configure and maintain remotely."
"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"The solution can scale well."
"The reporting you receive out of this appliance is excellent. You will not need an external management system."
"The dashboard I have found the most valuable in Fortinet FortiGate."
"The flexibility and ease of configuration are the most valuable features."
"FortiGate improved our security. It's one of the best hardware firewalls."
"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."
"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."
"I like the SSL VPN connection. Cyberoam works well for controlling users and authenticating their connection to the internet."
"The solution's web filtering is an important feature for us in our company."
"Our customers find it economical and offers good security. These two features are key. Ease of installation and implementation are also key factors."
"I found that the best feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is reporting. Its reporting feature is excellent, fast, and easy to prep and launch."
"There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN."
"The solution works perfectly without any users."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I would like to have logs, monitoring, and reporting for a month without extra fees."
"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 aren't really any negative aspects to discuss."
"Web security solutions can be improved."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"The captive portal could be improved."
"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."
"Its scalability is not that great."
"The product needs to improve its pricing."
"The Traffic Discovery feature should allow administrators to disconnect unnecessary live connections."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM could have a more advanced reporting function."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"In my experience the solution can be easier to configure with more documentation, we need more training."
"The setup is a bit complex, so we needed help from a consultant."
"VPN configuration is not very swift."
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 Sophos XG.
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.