We performed a comparison between Sophos UTM and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sophos, Cisco, WatchGuard and others in Unified Threat Management (UTM)."Brings greater visibility into the network traffic coming inside and passing away from the company."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos UTM is the efficiency and mail filtering module."
"The three most important features for us are web protection, web server protection, and network protection."
"It now controls all the security aspects of our web servers with Sophos UTM WAF."
"Configuration could not be made any easier."
"Sophos UTM's best feature is SIM in the cloud, which combines the gateway solution and endpoint solution to send telemetry data to the cloud and provides full contact visibility regarding security."
"Sophos UTM is the simplest of these products to setup."
"It meets our compliance needs in an elastic computer environment."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"The installation phase was easy."
"The server appliance is good."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"Over the thirteen years of using the product, we have not experienced a single compromise in our environment. During the COVID period, we faced numerous DDoS attacks, and the tool proved highly effective in mitigating these threats."
"With Sophos UTM, there is a general rule in the firewall when the country blocking can block some countries from accessing your data. In the current version, you still need to add it by putting in the IP range. This feature would be helpful for administrators and it gives them the advantage to block stuff in less time."
"The solution needs better integration with captive portals and XGs."
"Doesn't provide antivirus for individual computers."
"It needs a better user interface. The one they have is not so good."
"Anti-phishing functionality should be improved."
"We need to speed up the support."
"It is a little too CPU resource intensive, so we would like to see improvements there."
"There were a lot of features and functionality in Sophos SG UTM but nothing was state of the art in terms of technology. You did not get the latest functions. It was very monolithic as it was based on an old Linux PuTTY system."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 35 reviews. Sophos UTM is rated 8.4, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Blocks traffic and DDoS attacks ". Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate and Vectra AI.
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.