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."I like that they have given me a solution at a fair price."
"Layer-3 firewall and routing are the most valuable features."
"The main benefit is the grouping of our security monitoring."
"It's quite comfortable to handle the FortiGate firewall."
"Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"Advanced routing (RIP, OSPF, BGP, PBR). It gives you a seamless and simple integration into a large network."
"Fortigate represents a really scalable way of delivering perimeter network security, some level of layer 7 security, WAF, and also a way to create a meshed ADVPN solution."
"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."
"Its portal is user-friendly. I am able to manage the user data and access control through this device."
"It has been working fine. You just turn it on, and it works."
"I like the SSL VPN connection. Cyberoam works well for controlling users and authenticating their connection to the internet."
"For a small-medium enterprise this solution is easy to manage and operate."
"I find Sophos Cyberoam UTM very good. I like the feature of being able to block off Mac IDs that host users. For example, you have a Mac or Windows laptop and you created a hotspot. Other devices like mobiles and tablets e.g. iPads connected to that hotspot. We can block those devices that connected to the hotspot we created, only through Sophos. It's a good feature we didn't find in other UTMs."
"Cyberoam UTM's most valuable feature is that it can be configured any way you like."
"Our customers find it economical and offers good security. These two features are key. Ease of installation and implementation are also key factors."
"We are using it as a security shield. It does not allow access before that in case we have restricted a few things from users, so it helps me in that."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"The pricing could always be better."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"Fortinet needs more memory to save the log files. We need it to save the logs on the hardware and not in the cloud. I know this feature is available in FortiCloud, but if we need this log locally, it is not available."
"It should have a better pricing plan. It is too expensive. It should also have a more granular view of the attack. I don't have FortiAnalyzer, and it is difficult for me to have a complete view when there is an attack on my server."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"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."
"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."
"We have had some issues with technical support, which is an area that needs improvement."
"The implementation policy needs improvment."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM could have a more advanced reporting function."
"The solution should improve its scalability because it cannot support enterprise networks."
"The technical support response time could be faster."
"Sometimes, during part of the configuration, if you don't have a lot of technical knowledge, then you may struggle a bit to configure it."
"Technical support could be faster."
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 Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos UTM and SonicWall NSa.
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.