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."The SD-WAN function is very developed. It has SD-WAN functionality with security features in one device. We can manage from one single console SD-WAN and the security policy."
"I like how we can achieve total integration."
"UTM/NGFW features and FortiCloud for logs and backups are awesome."
"The user interface (UI) is very, very good."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"The reporting you receive out of this appliance is excellent. You will not need an external management system."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"What I like the most about Juniper is that they have the same CLI on all routers, switches, and firewalls. If you have worked with any Juniper device, such as a Juniper router, you will be able to work with an SRX, which is really cool. It is a nice experience to work with every device of Juniper, not only firewalls."
"Juniper is a highly flexible platform, and you get more bang for your buck compared to a Cisco product."
"The most powerful feature in Juniper SRX is definitely NCLS."
"From a protection perspective, it provides a network perimeter security function for our company."
"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."
"The firewall features and the routing capability are the most valuable."
"It's fine, and it's good. It's very stable."
"The solution has proven to be quite stable."
"Its portal is user-friendly. I am able to manage the user data and access control through this device."
"The dashboard is very good-looking and offers maximum features. If a customer's website has a problem, we can guide them over the phone because they can easily find the specific option on the dashboard. That's why we suggest buying Sophos."
"In some circumstances, the malware functionality is the most important feature, and in other cases, some other features."
"Content filtering, as this enables me to control that which employees can view at different time quotas."
"The user interface is well laid out and understandable."
"Web Filtering and Application Filtering saves a lot of my bandwidth and improves the user's productivity."
"The reporting features are very good."
"In terms of features and user-friendliness, the solution is good. It’s very stable. The solution is scalable. In Sophos Cyberoam UTM, the most valuable features are web and application filtering, routing functionalities, and VPN. It has helped us manage the bandwidth."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve the user interface. There should be more functionality and options through the GUI."
"FortiGate is really good. We have been using it for quite some time. Initially, when we started off, we had around 70 plus devices of FortiGate, but then Check Point and Palo Alto took over the place. From the product perspective, there are no issues, but from the account perspective, we have had issues. Fortinet's presence in our company is very less. I don't see any Fortinet account managers talking to us, and that presence has diluted in the last two and a half or three years. We have close to 1,500 firewalls. Out of these, 60% of firewalls are from Palo Alto, and a few firewalls are from Check Point. FortiGate firewalls are very less now. It is not because of the product; it is because of the relationship. I don't think they had a good relationship with us, and there was some kind of disconnect for a very long time. The relationship between their accounts team and my leadership team seems to be the reason for phasing out FortiGate."
"The sniffing packets or packet captures, can be simplified and improved because it's a little confusing."
"They should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"The solution could have licensing fees reduced in the future."
"They are doing good, but they can improve the distributor assignment. The availability of the product and the timeline of delivery are the main things. The distribution should be swift, and the distributor should not reach out to end customers directly. They should work as a distributor. There should also be one more local distributor. Currently, there is only one distributor in Pakistan, and the rest of them are in UAE. It is difficult to work with only one distributor. Sometimes, you don't get along with the same distributor, and that's why they should have one more distributor. Their licensing should also be improved. The activation or renewal of the product should be done from the date of renewal, not from the date on which the license expired."
"I think improvement can be done to the security part, particularly the UDM, and the product should have a user-friendly interface similar to FortiGate. It should have the Azure RBAC in the next release."
"The reporting is lacking."
"In some cases, customers encounter issues related to network interfaces, while others prioritize security concerns."
"As a networking person, I don't really have any major issues with this device. Based on my experience of using it in a cluster, it could be more stable. I had an incident when one of the SRXs in a cluster couldn't learn ARP. It is a good solution, but firewalls don't seem to be an area of development for Juniper. They are focusing on data centers, routers, and switches, not firewalls."
"The CLI is verbose. You have to say a lot to do a little. I don't like that part of it. Cisco's command syntax seems to be a good bit more concise. When you're trying to get something done, you don't want to have to type a bunch."
"Juniper SRX Series Firewall has to improve its web content site, like web filtration."
"The solution's configurations and syntax are specific and more complicated than other platforms."
"Junos Space should be improved to be on par with FortiGate's solution for managing firewalls and routing."
"The product’s pricing has increased by approximately 45% in four months. This particular area needs improvement."
"The solution should improve its scalability because it cannot support enterprise networks."
"Smaller CR15 units don’t have a hard disc or built in IView software. These units could do with that feature."
"Needs a mail alert/notification when the device loses any of its connections, during ISP redundancy implementation."
"The configuration requires an expert to be set up, so it could be made simpler."
"What needs improvement in Sophos Cyberoam UTM is openness in the competition among Sophos partners or any other Sophos product. Another area for improvement in the solution is pricing. It could be cheaper."
"The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing."
"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."
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 Netgate pfSense, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos UTM, Sophos XG and Untangle NG Firewall. 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.