We performed a comparison between Sangfor NGAF and Sophos Cyberoam UTM 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 IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"The user interface is relatively easy. The devices are easy to deploy and figure out when you have experience with other security appliances."
"Centralized monitoring, policy management, and virtualized appliances allow us to take control over our public and private infrastructure."
"The most useful functionality of Fortinet FortiGate is the user interface, multiple engines, and their cloud with the latest integrations. Additionally, the Security Fabric tool is very good."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"You might try Sangfor if you are on a tight budget. The price is affordable, and Sangfor offers a lot of features. We don't have any complaints about Sangfor."
"The stability of Sangfor NGAF is good."
"The product is very fast and reliable."
"It is a stable solution."
"The price versus value is good because the solution is less expensive than Sophos, Fortinet, or SonicWall."
"The absolute best part of Sangfor NGAF is their support. It's a 24/7 support channel, and the last time I requested their assistance I got a reply within three minutes. They helped solve the problem immediately."
"Sangfor has the best capabilities for securing connections, securing web browsers, securing servers, and general threat protection."
"It enables us to not only detect but also prevent various types of incoming threats, allowing us to take appropriate corrective actions and exercise control over the network."
"There are plenty of features that are valuable in the Sophos Cyberoam UTM. We use all the features, such as email Security, firewall rules, web server security, web devices, web protection."
"Content filtering, as this enables me to control that which employees can view at different time quotas."
"The VPN is excellent on the solution."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The solution has good load balancers."
"Good user interface."
"The user interface is well laid out and understandable."
"We are using it as a security shield. It does not allow access before that in case we have restricted a few things from users, so it helps me in that."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"Fortinet FortiGate can be integrated with different platforms. They have integrations in place, but I can't say they're 100%."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"With the addition of some features, it is possible that FortiGate can be used in all verticals."
"Maybe they could make some features more accessible, such as a way to translate directions between two networks that share the same subnets."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"Backup can be improved."
"There is room for improvement in dependency on certain infrastructure, like the DNS dependency on the current DNS server that the company has. It should be standalone. It should not depend on any other DNS server."
"I believe that IAM and NGFW need to merge into a single box, instead of there being two separate box solutions."
"The setup phase is quite complex."
"They need to improve their research team and they need to study their data to analyze it and build the product."
"The solution has too many bugs and these slow down the implementation."
"Occasional issues with breaches which are dealt with expediently."
"Lacks consistency in terms of filtering certain websites and applications."
"Sangfor could improve their interface capacity on the 5100 series model and upgrade their hardware from one gig to 10 gig. This would improve the overall throughput."
"Sometimes, users are timed out intermittently."
"Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs."
"SD-WAN should be included in the tool."
"The blocking needs to be improved."
"Hence, it needs to be easier to configure rules using the solution."
"The policy is a bit too vague."
"I would like to see a better content management pack and also the website searching should be better."
"Smaller CR15 units don’t have a hard disc or built in IView software. These units could do with that feature."
Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 30 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Sangfor NGAF is rated 7.8, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiOS and Check Point NGFW, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos UTM, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Sophos XG. See our Sangfor NGAF vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM 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.
