KerioControl Reviews

We use Kerio Control as our firewall.

The Kerio Product has come in handy in the area of Firewall management. Having visibility into the entire Organization through a dashboard. 

The firewall appliance itself is the most valuable feature.

I find it a bit costly to pay for the products that I am not using. They need to change their model in such a way that you don't have to pay for the products that you are not using. 

The GFI features that come with Kerio are stated below. When paying for the licenses we pay for license for everything yet we only use 5 products.

We only use 5 products out of the 10 we’ve paid for. We should have the option for paying for what we use not a blanket cost for everything

Internet aggregation and SDWAN Technology: The firewall should  allow growth in terms of allowing connectivity to SDWAN technology available in other firewall appliances.Link aggregation and SD-WAN (Software-defined Wide Area Network) are great features for businesses who need multiple links to the internet. They’re also useful where you are using multiple links and would like to connect to other sites, such as branch offices or cloud services.

Its local support and scalability is  also not good. I am looking forward to a more scalable product that will be able to grow with time and technology.

Cloud Support: The Firewall should have cloud support especially hybrid cloud support.

It should allow device identification without just stating that the devices are unrecognized-"unrecognized devices"

Sandboxing is one of those important firewall features that end users don’t even know is there. It takes a file or executable as you’re downloading it and opens it in a completely isolated and separate “test” environment.This is missing.

We have been using this solution for around one year. We are working with Kerio Control and other GFI products that come with it.

It has been a stable product. We haven't had any issues apart from yesterday when it somehow froze. It was the first time we experienced such an issue. 

Scalability is a bit of a challenge because you need to buy a new product if you want to upgrade to new technology. 

In other firewall products, you have options for scalability, but for this particular product, such an option is not available. For example, FortiGate firewall provides added technology capabilities that allow it to grow a bit. In Kerio Control, if I want to bring new technology like SD WAN, I need to buy a new product, or maybe do away with Kerio Control and use a new technology altogether.

At the moment, there is no proper local support for Kerio Control here in Kenya. It is hard to get service or assistance for anything. This is the challenge that I faced in using a Kerio product or a GFI product.

I used to work with Cisco products. We switched to Kerio because they promised a lot of products, and the initial cost was less as compared to other products.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. I learned this product on the job, and I never got any hands-on training. I just went to YouTube and oriented myself with it, and then I set it up quickly.

Its initial cost is less as compared to other products. It becomes a bit costly when you pay for the products that you don't use. We paid for almost all the products through subscription, but we are using only a few products. We use EndPointSecurity, Kerio Connect, WebMonitor, and LanGuard. We don't use the rest of the products.

I would rate Kerio Control a six out of ten. Its local support, scalability, and pricing model need to be improved.

It is for local use in our company of about one hundred users. It is also deployed to different clients, which are from twenty to two hundred users.

It provides security to the internal network and implements solutions through VPN to access specific internal services, without the need to open the network completely. The usage capacity of Kerio Control is enormous.

The ease of use and the ability to deliver customized solutions is incredible. When updating from version 9.2.4 to version 9.2.5, support services was able to remove 5 patches from version 9.2.5 in a very short amount of time to normalize the system.

Support responses. The response time was very good, but not excellent, because they were worried about their system normalization solution. They slightly delayed in answering direct queries.

I am evaluating version 9.2.6. I would like for there to be a difference between international and national links, something I can find in other firewalls.

Yes, in version 9.2.5, but we solved it quickly.

None

In general, I have not used it, except in version 9.2.5. The response was very good.

None

Simple initial setup.

An internal team implemented the solution.

In 2 years 80% of the investment was returned.

Initial implementation costs are comparable to a similar product due to the ease of performing basic operations.

The cost of the product has optional additions with very good prices. The product update is 25% of its value which is very good.

Yes, FortiGate.

Setting up a small laboratory is simple and fast, so you can see a small portion of the solution's benefits and what it will do to improve a business's security.

We are using the latest version. 

We have many customer sites and the solution gives us control over bandwidth internet.

I consider all of the features to be valuable. 

The solution should offer more dashboards. 

I have been using Kerio Control for ten or fifteen years. 

The stability is fine. 

The scalability is fine. 

The technical support is good.

The installation is straightforward. We have done this many times. 

We have three IT support engineers.

The price is fine. Our customers pay for their licenses annually. 

I would certainly recommend the solution to others. 

We have between 200 and 750 customers. 

I rate Kerio Control as a nine out of ten. 

Providing Firewall functionality, VPN connectivity and content filtering.

1. It decreased malware attacks in our network.

2. It improved employee productivity and data security.

1. The built-in anti-virus and perimeter security. 

2. The VPN feature.

1. The anti-virus and perimeter security functionality minimizes vulnerabilities in our network and better secures our data. This also decreases downtime of devices due to viruses and malware attacks. 

2. The VPN functionality has allowed staff to have stable remote connectivity on a secure and encrypted connection. This has improved the ability to get work done smarter and efficiently whilst working remotely (or from home).

1. More detailed reporting. 

 2. Sometimes you get a few challenges joining to a domain. 

3. Improved and simplified User Interface.

I have been using Kerio Control for over four years. 

It is a stable solution and we have not had any major stability issues in our four years of using it. 

It is very scalable. If you are using a Virtual Appliance make sure your hardware specifications are good then you can easily add licenses as your users increase. On hardware Appliances you might have to upgrade to a bigger appliance as your users increase.

The support is fine. The response time can improve. 

Yes, we switched due to the favourable pricing, many features and robust performance of Kerio Control.

The initial setup was straightforward. We deployed Hyper-V Appliances and everything worked as it should. Connecting the Appliances to MyKerio was pretty simple and hassle free.

In-house.

Our ROI is very good. The savings we have made after deploying were good. We have saved on downtime of devices due to attacks and man hours of the IT staff attending to these issues. This enabled us to invest time and resources into profitable projects rather than to support.

The setup cost is fair especially of the Virtual Appliances. The annual licensing is easy and priced fairly.

Yes we looked at Cyberoam and Sophos.

Kerio Control is a good solution which is reliable and easy to use.

We use it for our data plan. We are using its latest version.

The firewall and the content filtering options are valuable.

There isn't a lot to be improved. It works well as it is, but they can maybe improve the reporting side.

We have been using this solution for about five years.

It is pretty stable. We don't have any issues.

It scales easily without a challenge. We have about 400 users, but administrators directly work with it.

It was pretty straightforward. It took about an hour.

We deployed it ourselves.

Its licensing is yearly. You renew every year. Its price is all-inclusive.

It works well. I don't have a problem with how it works. I am also fine with its deployment, but it can be challenging if you don't have someone skilled or trained. If you have the skills, its deployment would be straightforward. You would be able to deploy it without a challenge. So, you just need to find the right person to deploy it.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

We use Kerio Control for controlling access to the web, and to protect the inside of the network.

I have been using Kerio Control for approximately five years.

The stability of Kerio Control is good.

We have not tried to scale the solution at this time.

The installation is straightforward.

The price of Kerio Control could be better, it is a bit overpriced compared to other solutions.

I rate Kerio Control an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is to provide our customers with a reliable and secure internet service for which they can perform bandwidth management and other operations.

This is a service that we set up for the yacht owners. They all want to carry the control over the yacht.

The most valuable feature is to provide users with the ability to log in to the portal page, keep track of their data usage and perform bandwidth management. It allows the captain to keep a log of everything that is happening and see who is using what bandwidth.

If somebody is using too much bandwidth then they have the option to throttle them back.

As of late, it seems that they can't release a version that doesn't have some type of bug. It crashes when it runs out of memory, and fixing this would be great.

I would like to be able to inspect https packets for the purpose of virus scanning.

This solution has been pretty stable overall. That said, there is room for improvement.

For some clients, some of the options cause problems. Filtering, for example, is something that one client does not need at all. Turning this off seems to straighten things out.

I have been awoken at 3 am by emails telling me that things are down, and that has happened within the past couple of updates, but not as much. I keep my eyes on the Kerio forums and watch for other people who say that it is time to upgrade again.

My impression is that it is pretty scalable and it can handle a lot of stuff.

I don't use it to the point where I'm linking multiple sites together, so I can't comment on that aspect.

We have the solution installed on approximately twenty boats now, and we're continuing to install them.

The technical support used to be great. However, it's gone way downhill. I used to speak directly to the person writing the code, and he would walk you through when you need help. Now, I can barely get a hold of him.

Thankfully, now that I know the software inside and out, I don't really need them.

I have used a couple of other solutions.

For me, they are straightforward. However, the reason we chose this solution is because it has to be something that the captain can understand. It has to be a straightforward user interface. 

If it were a situation where a client were going to be managing every aspect of it and the captain is not going to be involved, I would probably choose pfSense or something else.

This initial setup is straightforward. It is a no brainer, and anybody can get in there and just do it. They deployment takes maybe half an hour, if that.

It all depends on what they are requesting. It's not just "one size fits all". Some boats have a LAN they need set up, while some boats don't. We set up the unit sources and assign different ports.

These days they have a dedicated internet port, and they've got four or five land ports. We'll take one or two of the land ports and assign them to the Internet port, so that way they'll have a ship-to-shore connection, as well as a VSAT (Very small aperture terminal) connection. We'll also have another device with a cell router coming into the third connection, so that way they can switch between the three Internet connections when they need to.

For example, if they are out at sea they're going to use the VSAT, but if they are in the port then they will either use the ship-to-shore Wi-Fi, or the cellular connection, to save money.

We have eight technicians on site, but it only takes one person to handle the deployment. The maintenance is quick; we can log in remotely and update it if we need to. I prefer to be on site for this in case something goes wrong, but nine times out of ten everything is just fine.

We do the implementation ourselves.

There is a yearly upkeep fee.

We have evaluated WatchGuard and pfSense as well. We basically need something that is easy for the client because they want to have control over everything, and that's what Kerio is going to give them.

This solution is big in our industry because the captains have to have control over everything. If the captain wants to log in and see what his users, his crew members are doing, then Kerio provides that.

I suggest watching the Kerio forums for what the community is saying in terms of upgrades and support.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is for security purposes, web filtering, and firewalls. 

Kerio has improved my organization's security.

The most valuable feature would be the security. 

They should add wireless features. 

It's very stable. 

Scalability is okay. 

Technical support is good.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took one week. 

I implemented it myself. 

The price is inexpensive. 

I would tell someone considering this solution to go for it. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.