We performed a comparison between Barracuda CloudGen Firewall and SonicWall TZ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The customization potential is quite impressive."
"The license management is very valuable. You can get a new license each year, or you can enroll every two to four years. You can get the logs, and you will get the information on the risk in your network and the entire organization. With this information, you can take action on your actives, computers, or devices. You can bring your own device as an SSE."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a security device. It can optimize security on the networks of a company. It actually protects the company from attacks from outside. With FortiGate, you can categorize the users. You can create a group of users that can access all of the websites for their work. You can limit other users' access."
"Our project needs to link two sides through the internet. One of these was in Cairo and the other in another city. We used FortiGate as the integrating solution between the two locations, i.e. the Fortinet 30E & 100E."
"We are a visual effects company, and there have been a number of high profile security issues in our industry. This has brought us to a higher standard of security, which our clients are very keen on these days."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiGate protects against internet-based threats, both internal and external. It is scalable, stable, easy to use, and easy to install."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to offer firewall support to our clients."
"Most people are using enterprise applications remotely, and there is no license for SSL VPN, or in other words point-to-site. There is no limit on that. On other devices there is a specific limit and you have to pay per use for SSL VPN."
"It's great for handling complex items."
"Its central management, especially when it comes to distributed environments, is great. I can generate and save a setting and then apply that setting across the network with just one click."
"The antivirus protection or malware protection has been great."
"Its ability to block incoming attacks is valuable. Its logging, traffic monitoring, and VPN capabilities are also valuable."
"Enables us to define user application-level access, so our customers can work anytime from anywhere."
"Inbound and outbound traffic analysis, rule creation wizard, and the GUI portal are among the key features."
"I have found the stability of this product to be excellent."
"They give good protection to my network and support it."
"No negative impression of the scalability."
"Most of the features are useful. It is easy to configure and easy to troubleshoot. I can see the utilization of different networks, and there are also App control features."
"It protects against intrusion while allowing needed access."
"We like the unified threat management for defense-in-depth. We can terminate our site-to-site and remote access VPNs with it."
"Its user interface and simplicity are the most favorite parts for our clients. They find it stable and easy to use. Its performance is also good."
"The network security is great."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"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."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"Palo Alto has a feature called WildFire Analysis that is unavailable in FortiGate. WildFire is better than a sandbox because it can address zero-day threats and vulnerabilities. It can immediately identify zero-day threats from the cloud."
"The scalability could be better."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"One of the features that I would like to have is to do with endpoint production, it should be integrated. For example, the firewall gets notified of any kind of forensic event that needs to be done, such as if there is a ransomware attack and how it originated, all those records have to be available from the firewall, which is not."
"Lacks sufficient security options."
"When you do any commit, it locks your next access. If you are making a change to the device, from the security standpoint it's fine, but from the admin side it's not good. When you make changes, after each and every one it becomes locked."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The price is a bit higher than other vendors."
"It would be better if they had a trace and trap feature. It's hard for me to say anything bad about Barracuda. This is because we had a firewall go down in the town of Kirkland Lake, and it was a blown-out port, and they had an instant replacement."
"If you experience an attack it can take a very long time to find a solution."
"Command line could be more user friendly."
"They have a very complicated interface. It's very hard to learn."
"To start working with spam, it takes a while because the product has to see that multiple emails are coming in with all the spam. If it could reduce that amount of time, then we would reduce the amount of users who are receiving spam."
"In terms of what needs to be improved, I would say better load balancing and data filtering."
"The log analyzer in SonicWall TZ is something that they need to improve upon."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"Its pricing can be better. It is very expensive."
"I would like to see a SonicWall integration with the DLP tool, this would be interesting. Data Loss Prevention integration."
"The market seems to be going to a cloud-supported, new generation of firewall products. I think that's probably going to be important to us, the next time around."
"There can be an improvement in analysis and reporting. We need enhancement on the reporting side."
"The solution has lost the trust of its customers because of moving from one company to another."
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 35 reviews while SonicWall TZ is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 78 reviews. Barracuda CloudGen Firewall is rated 8.2, while SonicWall TZ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Barracuda CloudGen Firewall writes "Feature-rich, robust, and easy to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall TZ writes "Has efficient user access control feature and good technical support services ". Barracuda CloudGen Firewall is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, Azure Firewall and Cisco SD-WAN, whereas SonicWall TZ is most compared with Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, SonicWall NSa and SonicWall NSv. See our Barracuda CloudGen Firewall vs. SonicWall TZ report.
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.
I strongly recommend you SonicWall 5600. Its having lots of feature for network security and Comparison of price and Support it would be great choice.
Fortigate firewalls are quite rugged and offer great flexibility in configuring the policies and managing them. For individuals as well as group level user privileges. The antivirus offered is also very effective and not at all resource hungry. The only drawback is, the admin should be very well trained and aware of configuring the firewall. It’s quite complicated that way. Or the support provider (reseller) should have expert level admins to configure and set these firewalls in the infrastructure.
I would alternatively suggest looking into Sophos firewalls. They are equally rugged and effective. And also have a much user-friendly configuration and management console.
Barracuda: No Presence in the market at all, quite different way to install manage the product. Impossible to find the technical resource. If it is managed by Multinet then it’s a different story.
UTM control was not good back in the days, not sure about recent improvements.
Support Generally good feedback of Barracuda support.
Sonicwall: Very little presence in the local market, will have compatibility issues when establishing VPN with other vendors or any other integration.
UTM should be good, not experienced it first-hand.
Support, Have horrible feedback about support. they don’t respond for months.
Fortinet: Firewall full of features, good market presence with official REPs in the country. It is basically the same Juniper SSG ScreenOS platform with good UTM.
UTM is good
Support, Support in the region from India is poor, fright. A good local partner can make your day. If case is escalated to US/Canada teams, the experience is much better. You need in-country REPs support to escalate the cases.
China effect, the downside of Fortinet is, its QA of new FortiOS release is not good at all. Things running fine on one release fail badly when upgraded to new release. you need to be ready for an alternate solution when faced with such situation.
But it is better than Barracuda and SonicWall anyways.
RMA time is not next day.
Palo Alto: I would recommend Palo Alto, it can do everything typically required from a NGFW/UTM. Price can be expensive. Typically models with high throughput are quoted from most vendors. In reality, the actual required throughput is not that much. PA820 and PA220 can cater 90% of requirement we have in our environments. This way solution will be comparatively competitive cost wise. Compatibility with third-party devices is good.
Per-user bandwidth limit is missing.
UTM is best.
Support is good. The first level is through support partners, but the experience is good.
No rapid RMA, as no in-country depot exists. But On site spare is best, as the customer owns the spare unit on his premises.
Fortinet is a good option, the interesting thing with them is all the other bits you can add. Many of these such as email protection, Sandbox, edge device protection (anti-virus, VPN Connector for PCs), tokens (electronic or hardware), switches, Wireless Access Points all talk to each other so the Fortinet security umbrella covers them as well. Fortinet has a SIEM as well.
Whatever you buy, get training on it. Also, evaluate the reseller's ability to do an install. Some folks just sell the product, other also know how to install - buy from the latter, and get some Pro Services for the installation.
I have always thought Barracuda's marketing was better than the products (it is very good marketing) and SonicWALL R&D suffered under Dell, and I don't know that it is any better now they are owned by an Investment house.
Out of these three firewalls I would, and have chosen Fortinet. Checkout NSS Labs for real world comparisons. I have been using Fortigates for 2 years now in HA configurations and have only once had to use the cli. Also updates and firmware upgrades never bring the network or internet down. These firewalls get new features added at no extra cost and the throughput is amazing. Buying the UTM bundles gets you all of the features you need and more. I heard about support issues but evertime i call i get routed to someone who knows how the features work and actually helps. We added a fortianalyzer and now we can see logs from all of the firewalls in one console and hold them for a year. Fortinet doesn't just manage their antivirus products they are the developers. These firewalls decrypt data on the fly and scan for viruses before it gets to your email, desktops or servers. Within the first week it caught ransomware within a yahoo email before it could infect our systems. We replaced our websense URL filtering with the URL filtering within the fortigates and never looked back.
I could go on and on but the real tilt in Fortinets favor was it was near half the cost of similar features and functions PA had quoted. Write down what you want and then ask if the vendors have these included in their firewalls or if they have separate appliances that can do them. Every appliance has a latency cost associated with it. You might find that all three can do what you want then it will come down to the management of the firewalls and cost.
Good luck.
I've utilized both SonicWALL and Fortinet in many implementations over the years. Fortinet does a better job in large, multi-tenant deployments and has excellent stateful packet inspection throughput. If you're planning to do SSL decryption and inspection, SonicWALL is the way to go (and currently, the product we lead with). I've found SonicWALL to be easier to manage and have also found that if you're a GUI-oriented user, all of the features are there in the UI. On the Fortigate you'll often have to dig into the CLI to enable some features.
The Barracuda products are very good and quite pricey, especially since you mentioned you were looking at the Sonicwall TZ series. The Sonicwall TZ series is meant for a smaller environment. The Fortinet firewalls are great but require a little more training. My experience with Sophos is that they have been a little buggy and support is not great. Since Sonicwall was sold by Dell the support has been better. I work with several small companies and I would say go with whatever product you have the most experience with. The learning curve can be a little much when you don't know what you're looking at. Both Sonicwall and Fortinet have pretty good support and a pretty extensive KB. Good Luck!
fortinet or baracuda and CISCO ASA 5500 series also good