Compare McAfee StoneGate vs. Sophos XG

McAfee StoneGate is ranked 27th in Firewalls with 1 review while Sophos XG which is ranked 15th in Firewalls with 9 reviews. McAfee StoneGate is rated 8.0, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of McAfee StoneGate writes "It works well with a highly-active cluster". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Gives us customizable policies, modifiable templates, and customized rules for single users". McAfee StoneGate is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, pfSense and Cisco Firepower NGFW, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Sophos UTM, Fortinet FortiGate and pfSense.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco ASA NGFW Logo
129,040 views|52,725 comparisons
McAfee StoneGate Logo
2,159 views|636 comparisons
Sophos XG Logo
37,564 views|28,773 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: July 2019.
360,852 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides.Integration with all the other Cisco tools is valuable.We moved from a legacy firewall to the ASA with FirePOWER, increasing our Internet Edge defense dramatically.Cisco ASA NGFW significantly improves our bank. It protects any high-value products that we use from hackers, viruses, malware, and script-bots. It gives us metrics on network traffic as well as what kind of attacks we are getting from the outside.Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization.The feature that I found most valuable is the overall stability of the product.The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. Because of our customer experience as an integrator company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have a good performance reputation with Cisco ASA.I would say the Firepower module is most valuable. I'm trying more to transition to this kind firewall. I had to study a little on Palo Alto Networks equipment. There is a lot I have to learn about the difference.

Read more »

It works well with a highly-active cluster.We did not have issues with scalabiliy.

Read more »

The SL VPNs are the most valuable feature. I have a lot of systems out of the head office that need to connect to the local networks, and they all connect wirelessly via the Sophos VPN client.It gives me a very good, stable connection in all tunnels.Sophos XG has cybersecurity. It integrates with the antivirus software.We have found that the simplicity of the XG 210 is its most valuable feature.It has a very friendly interface like the Cyberoam iNG units, it has customizable policies, it has proper templates that you can even modify, and you can customize the rules, down to each single user.The dashboard is customizable as well. It gives you the feature of including what you need to see as soon as you open the dashboard and to remove the non-necessary stuff, which varies from one organization to the next and from one IT manager to the next. And it has a wide variety of reports as well, template and customizable reports.Valuable features include: the ease of setting up the VPN connection; the fact they have the cloud management option, so I can manage the firewall on a cloud platform from anywhere I am; the user interface is very user-friendly, so it's very easy for the administrator to make any policy changes.The most valuable feature, according to the setup we have at our work place here, is the flexibility of the system or the firmware that's running the appliance. It's so flexible, performing multiple rules with different configurations. According to the set up here, we need to implement several firewalls with different access levels, because we have a variety of users. For this requirement, it's very flexible and very easy to use.

Read more »

Cons
There was an error in the configuration, related to our uplink switches, that caused us to contact technical support, and it took a very long time to resolve the issue.With regards to stability, we had a critical bug come out during our evaluation... not good.The product would be improved if the GUI could be brought into the 21st Century.Cisco should improve its user interface design. There is a deep learning curve to the product if you are a newcomer.There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products.One of my main concerns, an area that could use improvement is in adjusting the need to buy a license to enable features.Usually, the customers are satisfied, but I am going to recommend that all clients upgrade to FirePOWER management. I want Cisco to improve the feature called anti-spam. We use a Cisco only email solution, that's why we need the anti-spam on email facility.The installation and integration of Cisco ASA with FirePOWER can be improved. The management with Fortigate is easier than Cisco ASA on FirePOWER. The management side of Cisco ASA can be improved so it can be more easily configured and used.

Read more »

After some experience with the solution, we had to do some redesign, but generally, we were happy with the product.

Read more »

The initial set up process can be a little tricky, especially when you are registering with Sophos using your registration number. Setup is not necessarily complex, but it's not trouble-free. You do have connectivity issues at the initial setup with registering the device on the Sophos platform to access the advanced features. It doesn't always go through the first time around. That may be an issue with the quality of our automation. I'm not sure exactly what it is.I would like to have remote access to clients using a static IP for a certain period of time.The only issue that Sophos XG now needs to improve is the product's reporting capability.When I call, I have to wait at least one to two hours to reach them.Let's say I set up a rule to block users from accessing YouTube or Facebook. The rule will only block the HTTP traffic, which is non-secure traffic... The problem comes when you are trying to block, or allow, similar traffic that uses HTTPS. You have to create a certificate and import it into the users' web browsers, whatever they are using... The problem occurs when you're dealing with roaming users who use laptops and have to move between different sites that have different types of policies applied to them. You have to import all sorts of certificates from each site into their browser. Doing so will most probably conflict with something else that is totally irrelevant and cause a problem.Since Sophos took over Cyberoam, the online technical library and support library have become super messy. To get a piece of information is becoming a nightmare. They need to reorganize the online technical support and technical library.I would like the update process to be easier, to update the firmware of the boxes. I think it's much better automatically than having to do it manually: Download the file, do network discovery. I they can make the update process much more automatic that would help.It is performing well. However, the only challenges that we are facing are the effectiveness with blocking the proxy and tuneling applications, aside from proxy and similar applications. So the application filter on the product is not really performing 100%. Every now and then there are some updates that are happening on such applications, and it takes time until it gets the appropriate updates and becomes capable of capturing such applications and blocking them. A new feature I would really like to see would be some sort of an enhanced application filter with greater efficiency when it comes to the applications that can bypass firewall policies. These applications are really a nightmare. Once they are on the network and not detected, or the appliance is not really successful in capturing them and unblocking them, the bandwidth gets wasted all the time.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs.We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement.The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market.Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions.Pricing is high, but it is essentially a corporate decision.The cost is a bit high compared to other solutions in the market.Cisco recently has become very expensive.The cost is a bit higher than other competitive solutions on the market.

Read more »

Information Not Available
We are paying about $1,500 yearly for the Enterprise Plus. As far as I know, there aren't costs above this standard fee.It's a suitable price and license.For licensing the XG 210, we paid approximately $3000 for three years. There are no additional fees on top of this.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
360,852 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASAMcAfee Next Generation Firewall, Stonesoft, Intel Next Generation Firewall, Intel Security StoneGate
Learn
Cisco
McAfee
Sophos
Overview

Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device.

Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution.

Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW.

StoneGate is a Highly Available Firewall/VPN. The StoneGate fault-tolerant VPN maintains sessions across multiple VPN devices and multiple Internet or network connections, regardless of device or connection failures. StoneGate provides Security, Manageability, Availability, and Scalability thus reducing network security complexity and costs. Stonesoft was the inventor of high availability for security solutions and a recognized leader in network security.

Sophos XG Firewall is next gen firewall that is optimized for today’s business, delivering all the protection and insights you need in a single, powerful appliance that’s easy to manage.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about McAfee StoneGate
Learn more about Sophos XG
Sample Customers
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.Avency, R€SLER Oberfl_chentechnik GmbH, MAUSER Group, CEMEX, Cegedim, Fusion Media Networks
Information Not Available
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm19%
Manufacturing Company12%
Comms Service Provider12%
University7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider14%
13%
Software R&D Company12%
Manufacturing Company9%
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Manufacturing Company16%
Comms Service Provider11%
K 12 Educational Company Or School10%
9%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business38%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise37%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business42%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise33%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business50%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise25%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise43%
Large Enterprise21%
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: July 2019.
360,852 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email