SonicWall NSa Reviews

Our use case is for firewall security. The solution is deployed on-premises.

It's an all-in-one solution. We can do the hosting and security all under one box. The UTM is a good feature.

The dynamics needs to be improved. The solution is not very compatible compared to the market products.

The solution is stable. We need only one or two people for maintenance.

It is scalable. We have around 100 users, and we have plans to increase usage.

Technical support is good.

Initial setup was easy. We mostly did the installation ourselves. One person is enough to complete the installation. Depending on the network, it only takes a couple of minutes to do because it's so simple.

I would give this solution 10 out of 10. I would recommend it to others; it's a good solution.

We have two SonicWalls in the High Availability setup with failover configuration.

We use it for the firewalling, for IPS protection and for VPN clients.

With SonicWall we have more insight in the applications that users are using and what they are doing on the internet, so we can monitor better. It gives us better monitoring.

We now have more insight and information; what protocols and what websites users are trying to reach and what is blocked and what is not blocked, so we can better follow the tracks of the users.

The features that I have found most valuable are the firewalling, which is very good and the GUI which is very intuitive. It is easy to use and provides great security.

Overall, I'm quite happy about the product. The configuration and the interface are very good. Maybe the pricing and licensing could be improved.

It is not scalable. If your enterprise is growing hard then you have to buy another, bigger product. Maybe if you use it virtually it is more scalable.

We have been using SonicWall NSa for maybe eight to 10 years.

I work for several companies, and we use the NSa with one of them.

It is very stable.

Scalability is an issue. If you need to scale for more performance you will need another product in a higher range. You cannot scale the product itself. That's not possible.

It is not scalable at all.

We have about 350 users. I do the maintenance on my own.

We use it daily.

We do not have plans to increase at the moment.

Their technical support is very good.

The initial setup is not complex, it is very easy.

In terms of my implementation strategy - at first I write down the case we need. I investigate all the uses we have to implement with the SonicWall, and then I install and configurate it. I think the primary configuration was maybe three or four hours.

It was all done by myself.

You can buy the license for one or three years, and we mostly choose the three year. That's a little bit cheaper.

We looked at the Cisco and we looked at the Palo Alto, but the SonicWall was the most valuable for the pricing, the best product for us. The main difference is the pricing.

SonicWall NSa is a very good product with a very nice price, and it is low-level to use.

It is easy to manage and easy to implement.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give SonicWall NSa a nine because of the stability and the easy-to-use GUI. It's a very nice product.

At the organization I used to work for, this solution was used as the primary perimeter firewall. We had 11 sites. Each site had a firewall that sat behind a router and did all the filtering.

The security features we pretty good. The antivirus and items of that nature were quite helpful to have.

The web sourcing was very good. 

The stability was very good.

We found the installation to be pretty straightforward.

Sometimes I found the GUI and some of the features a little bit hard to navigate, as opposed to Fortigate, which is much more user-friendly. 

What Fortigate has which SonicWall doesn't, is the per rule natting. SonicWall only does the central mapping. If they could include something like per rule natting it would be better.

I've used the solution for about three years or so.

The solution was very stable. There were no bugs or glitches. It didn't crash or freeze. It was reliable. There were no breaches.

The solution was quite scalable. If a company needed to expand it, it could do so.

We had 300 or so users at our organization using the product.

I do not work for the company anymore. I can't speak to their plans for the solution and if they plan to increase usage or not. 

I had experience with support in the past and I found them to be helpful and responsive. I was very pleased with their level of assistance.

I'm currently using Fortigate now. I switched companies and this company uses Fortigate.

The installation process isn't too difficult. It's pretty easy and rather straightforward. A company shouldn't have any trouble with the initial setup.

The time it takes to deploy depends on the company, however, I recall it only took about an hour or so at our organization. Physically, you might need help with the actual setup, however, for the most part, a person could handle it alone.

I was able to handle the process myself. I did not need the assistance of a consultant or integrator. 

Our organization would pay for a license every two to three years.

I was a customer and an end-user. I never had a professional relationship with SonicWall.

I would recommend the product to other organizations.

I'd rate the solution overall at a seven out of ten.

SonicWall suits our business, also cost-wise, and commercial-wise. It is in a feasible range for our organization.

We like the features, but the main thing is from a commercial and cost perspective it is very good.

The interface is user-friendly.

Vendor support needs improvement. The frequency of time and support should be increased.

From a vendor perspective, we were expecting more support.

When we experience a technical issue, it should be rectified immediately. We are facing a delay with response and resolution.

I have been using SonicWall NSA for approximately eight years.

SonicWall is stable.

This is a scalable solution.

We have approximately 2,000 users.

We are facing some issues with compatibility. We have moved to the latest version.

 Previously, we were using another version and the 5000 model of NSA.

It is fine. It is user-friendly.

It took a month and a half to deploy

We have a dedicated team here. They handle all of our deployment and troubleshooting.

We have a team of six to seven administrators to deploy and maintain this solution.

SonicWall is not an expensive solution.

I would recommend this version of SonicWall to others who are interested in implementing this solution. This latest version is quite fine.

I would rate SonicWall NSA an eight out of ten.

Our operation depends heavily on Internet access and we depend on a solution that can provide us with productivity and security for the continuity of our business.
With this need, we implemented a SonicWall NSA firewall to control all access to and from the Internet.

With the deployment of the SonicWall NSA solution, we never suffered a problem due to invasion or contamination of any kind.

The solution always responded very efficiently, delivering us:

• High productivity in our operation through access control capabilities;
• Security for our information with advanced deep inspection features, including SSL traffic.

This solution has always delivered us security features with great efficiency like:

• Web content filter with a very extensive and always updated database;
• IPS with an extensive list of signature attacks;
• Anti-virus system with cloud sandbox that inspects 'file-less' attacks and delivers only after the verdict;
• Real time flow inspection system;
• Application Control with an extensive list of signatures;
• DPI-SSL inspection in the data layer;
• SSO with LDAP directory services.

The solution was deployed to suit all areas of the company.

This product is unable to secure access to endpoints for our external employees. Our next plan will be to deploy a solution for visibility and control of 'shadow IT' applications and also to provide security for accesses outside our company. We plan to use another solution from SonicWall, such as Cloud App Security (CASB), to meet the needs of our external employees.

The solution has always been very stable and efficient.

My impression is that the solution is quite scalable.

Support services are categorized by the criticality level. We had a few critical events, but each was attended quickly and efficiently.

Before this solution, we used Microsoft Forefront TMG Server.

We migrated because the solution was proxy-based and did not have the features of NG firewalls.

Initially, we had to review our security policy and this was the stage that involved the highest level of complexity.

With the policy defined according to our needs, the initial configuration of the solution was simple, but obviously, because it is an advanced-level security solution, it must be implemented by a specialized professional.

The solution was implemented by our internal team. Our team participated in an official solution training prior to deployment.

This question is very relative as we are dealing with an asset. But for our business, it was positive for a short period of time.

In our evaluation, we found that the costs of deploying the solution, and also purchasing the hardware and licenses, were very attractive.

The ratio of costs vs efficiency of SonicWall products is very good.

We did not test other solutions.

We are integrators, but for SonicWall, we use it for a specific project in industrial cybersecurity. It was for ransomware recovery and network restoration.

We did the firewall and the configuration for the ransomware prevention.

Our clients were using it to control the SCADA System in their industry.

The most valuable features of this solution are the GUI pre-filtering and the ATP (advanced threat protection). Also, the ATP packet capture is helpful. We used these features during our restoration.

The content ID needs to be improved. If I compare it with Palo Alto, there are more features in Palo Alto that are not included in SonicWall. For example, PDoS is not available in the current version, that I could find.

They do have DLP and Host protection, but not PDoS.

Also, the IPS and the UTM need to be improved.

I haven't found anything regarding the IoT security in the device security on SonicWall.

I have been working with SonicWall for one year.

We are working with NSA 3600, which is the latest version.

We have no complaints about the model.

The scalability level is medium. They are okay with the model, the throughput, and the traffic rate.

We did not require technical support.

Currently, we are running Palo Alto, Check Point, and SonicWall.

Two or three months ago, we were working with Fortinet FortiGate. We have also used Vyatta.

This solution was not implemented properly.

The AV enforcement feature in SonicWall is limited to only one vendor for antivirus, which is Kaspersky. It's the only antivirus solution that we can enforce through the firewall.

Other vendors provide you with multiple options such as Sophos, Kaspersky, Trend Micro, and Bitdefender.

I would rate SonicWall NSA a six out of ten.

I am a consultant. I work with a software dealer in the IT security business.

I deployed SonicWall for a customer just last month.

It's very simple to use and the support is great. I am in India and they have a support office here. As a company product, SonicWall firewalls and their support has been excellent.

It's a simple, rugged product. When I say rugged, mechanically, it's a very rugged box. The same thing applies to Sophos also, it's also a very rugged box. It's rugged technology, it can take a beating and still be operational. 

One of the greatest strengths of the SonicWall system is that they have multiple portals for multiple tasks, whereas all the other solutions have no single tool for doing multiple tasks. That has been one major advantage of SonicWall. Regarding the SonicWall box, you need to be capable of taking multiple loads compared to the competition. That's a very unique feature of the SonicWall system. They also have an antivirus solution that is tied to their system which is called SentinelOne.

The support is very good. The product is also very reliable. There are always new, frequent updates — nothing more or less. It's very flexible; it's ready to go right out of the box, unlike some other solutions which require a lot of training. The GUI is very user-friendly. Even if you've never touched a firewall in your life, with a bit of time and practice, you'll get the hang of it.

In terms of improvement, they should consider changing the logic of how the rules are created. Everything is spread out into multiple pockets, so to speak; it should be more condensed. The technology is sound; I am not saying that it's brilliant, but it is very sound for most mid-range uses — it does a fantastic job.

They should consider upgrading the capabilities within the GUI. The way the GUI is configured for creating rules, I would say they should consider making that a bit more flexible. That would really help a lot.

I have used SonicWall NSA for three years.

SonicWall NSA is very stable. I ran my last box for 10 years before I switched it off. 10 years is a long time for anything. If it can run for 10 years, it's stable. It's money made twice over. It might not be technologically up to speed and it may not be upgradeable, but that's a different matter.

These boxes are well-known for the amount of mechanics and users they can handle.

The initial setup is very easy.

The basic setup takes roughly half an hour. After that, when it comes to configuring the rules and dependencies, with ideal conditions, I would say that it takes roughly a week. Overall, within two to three weeks, we were in production.

Roughly 90% (50% in the worst-case scenario) of the customer's settings are ready within a couple of days from the time the box is powered up. When you power up the box, you have to set the rules. So, I implement it, engage the rules, and then ask somebody to test some of the connections and give me some feedback. That takes a bit of time, but otherwise, it only takes a couple of days until the box is ready. If you want to push it, within a week it's possible to reach roughly 90% to 95% production — the rules and the performance have to be fine-tuned which takes a little bit of time.

 I would definitely recommend SonicWall for their simplicity of use, but if you can configure SonicWall, have a look at Sophos also. Sophos has put a lot of hard work into their connections and the GUI. SonicWall's GUI is slightly lacking compared to Sophos' GUI; however, capabilities-wise, Sophos doesn't have a lead over SonicWall.

If I had to make a recommendation to a customer, I would tell them to look at both products. I would push the Sophos box because it has certain advantages, technologically, compared to SonicWall. For example, they have their own antivirus solution — the Sophos antivirus solution. It's a firewall as well and the tool will communicate with the central cloud. From the cloud instance, you can control the system.

The Sophos gateway has got allied products, like SD run connectors. You can manage the same rules between multiple firewalls because they're all connected to the same account. Overall, Sophos is superior to SonicWall.

The first requirement of a paying customer, independent of their choice of product, is to check if the technical support of the product is locally available. That's the first requirement I would give to any customer. The product may be great but if the support in your geographical region is not there, then it's not worth it.

Take Trend Micro for example. If you're a customer of Trend Micro but you're not in the immediate support region, then what happens? You will have to raise a ticket and wait, but you don't have anybody on the ground to come to your office and do an emergency scan and raise your ticket, so it's a bit of a dangerous issue. I would recommend a product that has both local technical and physical support.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SonicWall a rating of eight.

We use SonicWall NSA as part of our overall security solution.

This product handles what we're expecting in a box like this.

This product is user-friendly and easy to configure.

The logging is very good, as long as it is configured properly.

It would help us a lot of SonicWall sent us more information about the latest updates and things that are changing.

I would like to have the capability for full active-active mode.

I have been working with SonicWall for about 14 years, since 2007.

This is a stable product.

SonicWall is scalable. Depending on the size of the box that I have, if the demands increase then I can upscale it. These demands are based on the users and their activities. We have between 2,000 and 2,500 users.

The support that I get from SonicWall is good. They have supported us for more than ten years and we haven't faced any issues with them to this point.

I have not worked on any other platforms.

SonicWall NSA is easy to install. I have not personally completed an installation lately, but it used to take me no more than half an hour to move from one box to another. The box can be configured offline and then moved online afterward, which makes it easier.

I used to work on SonicWall regularly. Now, I am working as an IT analyst and my job is to check the SonicWall configuration and test it. For example, I have to check the policy and then audit which ports are open.

The pricing and value are good.

SonicWall fulfills our requirements and it does it well. My advice for anybody who is considering this product is to properly understand their requirements. As long as SonicWall meets the needs, I can recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.