We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall 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."It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"This solution made it very easy to manage our bandwidth."
"The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"Web filtering and two-factor authentication are great features."
"It enables our organization to become more productive. Also, it protects our NEtWare from viruses and malware."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"Offers good security and filtering."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"Juniper is a highly flexible platform, and you get more bang for your buck compared to a Cisco product."
"One of Juniper SRX's most valuable features is the site-to-site VPN."
"We think they have a good interface, the operating system is good, it's robust. It has plenty of great features, and the relation between the cost and benefits works for our business."
"It is a complete security bundle. The cloud-based Sky Advanced Threat Prevention feature is very valuable. I am 100% satisfied with the performance of the Juniper firewall. It has a very good throughput. It works very fine. We use our firewall as a site-to-site VPN or Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN). In both cases, it has a very good and optimum performance. Their service support is very good in India. I get really good support from the Juniper team."
"We use it as a firewall at our head office and branches."
"Using a Juniper CLI, you configure a "candidate configuration", then "commit" it to bring it live. If you do not like it or messed up something, you just "rollback" to the previous configuration. It can all be done in a matter of minutes. This is super handy once you get use to it."
"The user interface is good."
"It's a reliable firewall and very stable, for both the hardware and applications it is stable."
"It has been working fine. You just turn it on, and it works."
"SD-WAN and IPSec features are valuable to me."
"The security capabilities are okay."
"The performance has been good overall."
"The tool's robust features allow for the customization of policies, objects, and firewall settings."
"In some circumstances, the malware functionality is the most important feature, and in other cases, some other features."
"The most valuable feature is the IPSec forwarding."
"The solution is excellent for web and application filtering and remote access with the VPN."
"Quality control on their firmware versions needs improvement. When they introduce new firmware, there tend to be bugs."
"We'd like more management across other integrations."
"The performance and speed are aspects of the solution that could always be improved upon."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard and UI, as well as to the reporting."
"Fortinet FortiGate is not very easy to use. The navigation could be improved to make it easier to use."
"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 support is the main thing that needs to be improved."
"The cloud management and automation capability could be improved."
"It would be ideal if the solution could use cloud services to help update signatures or threat prevention systems."
"Its logging is very good, but we would like to have an easier way of creating more reports. We would like to be able to manipulate the reports or manage the way the reports are coming out."
"I think Juniper SRX should have a GUI. Some of the competitors are already implementing GUI for the firewall."
"The centralized management platform could be improved."
"While the GUI is pretty good on the Juniper side, there can still be tweaks made to it that will make it even better."
"In terms of other features, I'd like to see a web filter, 10 point control, application control and a DNA filter in the next release."
"The web interface on Juniper SRX is just a short conversion from Junos OS CLI; this is not very suitable for users with little expertise/"
"The solution is quite advanced. You need a lot of training to use it effectively."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM could improve by adding VPN site-to-site capabilities. The correct version does not work with Microsoft Azure Cloud."
"On-box sandstorm should be available. As of now, it is from their cloud."
"The product strategy of the manufacturer is strange. I don't understand what they are doing in that regard."
"The product had a hang issue. We needed to reboot, recreate the image, and reconfigure the previous image because the product hanged frequently."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM has room for improvement in specific rules-based objects and redesign. The solution also needs to improve in adding rules and policies, including renewing and finding policies."
"The product fails to provide proper reports, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The solution's pricing could be a problem for some small businesses."
"The VPN needs to be improved."
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 4th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 86 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Check Point NGFW, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Sophos UTM, SonicWall NSa and Sophos XG. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall 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.