Sangfor NGAF Reviews

We use the solution to connect and protect all the internal servers. All publicly accessible websites and servers are connected to the solution.

The product is very fast and reliable. It has a quick response.

The solution should be able to work in a hybrid setup.

I have been using the solution for one and a half years.

Around 150 users are using the solution in my organization. Both internal and external traffic goes through the firewall because the firewall is placed on the main data center.

If we have any issues, we read the documentation. If the issue cannot be fixed, we can contact the support team. I have not contacted the support team yet. I configure things by myself.

We were using Cisco’s firewall before. It ended support. We cannot use the products that have ended support. Cisco and Sangfor work similarly, but their GUIs are different.

The initial setup is very easy.

It is one of the cheapest tools in the market. The choice depends on the customer’s budget.

Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

Sangfor NGAF is a complete firewall solution.

The most valuable feature of Sangfor NGAF is its integration.

Sangfor NGAF could improve the policies and default criteria. They could be much better.

I have been using Sangfor NGAF for approximately three years.

Sangfor NGAF is stable.

The scalability of Sangfor NGAF is good.

We are using the Sangfor NGAF as our firewall, we have approximately 6,000 to 8,000 end users who are passing through. We have approximately 10 to 15 people using the Sangfor SSL VPN feature remotely from home.

The support from Sangfor NGAF here in Pakistan is great. Whenever I have an issue the support helps me out efficiently.

I rate the support from Sangfor NGAF a five out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of Sangfor NGAF is straightforward. Sophos and Fortinet have more difficult initial setups.

I rate the initial setup of Sangfor NGAF a five out of five.

The license of Sangfor NGAF can be purchased at different interval lengths, such as annually or three years. They offer a range of packages to choose from, such as combo or hybrid packages. We are using the complete solution package which includes IM, NGF and SSL VPN, and WAF. 

We have purchased the support for three years.

My advice to others is they should try the solution. I have experienced other solutions, such as Fortinet and I feel much better using this solution overall.

I rate Sangfor NGAF a nine out of ten.

My company's customers use the solution as a firewall. Some prefer Sangfor NGAF as a replacement for their current existing firewall. The reason why I am proposing Sangfor NGAF is mainly because of its price point. The tool is very cost-effective compared to other brands.

The tool's most effective part stems from the product's ease of use, which is very important because the client has to manage it at the end of the day.

I think the tool has the feature to detect and kill ransomware in three seconds. The tool claims that it can kill the ransomware on the spot in three seconds and restore all the encrypted files.

The tool's support is an area of concern where improvements are required. The support should be available locally, I would say. As of now, I think the tool is moving towards offering local support. I have heard from my previous customer that the support is actually from another region, making it quite hard for them to get in touch with the technical team.

I have been using Sangfor NGAF for a year. My company is a reseller of the product. I don't remember the version of the solution.

It is a stable solution because of the ease of use and inside the firewall itself, the tool offers WAF. Customers who hear that WAF is integrated into the firewall get interested in the solution. WAF is actually another solution. Instead of purchasing a WAF product, you get it inside Sangfor NGAF. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

In our company, we deal with a wide range of things. The scalability depends on what range the customer chooses. I can't pinpoint or explain the tool's scalability aspect in detail. Different types of firewall models are available.

Under five customers of my company use the tool, and they are all enterprise businesses.

I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

If one is difficult and ten is easy to set up, I rate the product's initial setup phase an eight out of ten. I never deployed the tool. I am sharing my engineering experience.

I am not quite sure about the deployment situation.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

If one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the tool's price as three out of ten. I am not quite sure about the tool's pricing point.

Sangfor NGAF has not shared how it has impacted our customer security operations with my company's sales team. If they do share such information, it is usually with the sales team while I am on the presales team. I am only a consultant, so the product doesn't share such details directly with me.

The tool helped our customers with threat mitigation strategies because it has AI functionalities that are helpful.

Suppose an enterprise customer wants a firewall as the first thing inside the company because of its cost-effectiveness. In that case, I think Sangfor NGAF can be a good option as it comes with the features and abilities of the firewall. I think it is quite a great option for enterprise users.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We're using it more for VPN tunneling and security. We're integrating it with the SoundCloud platform to use it in our data center.

We're happily using the IP vSEC VPN. We will use some credentials to connect it to two different sites.

Sangfor's tech features and technologies are more powerful than those of the other solution providers in terms of security. They also have big solutions in terms of cybersecurity.

It has an issue with the Sangfor Cloud Platform rather than the firewall. When we run a virtual machine, the window tabs display Chinese characters. This could be a hindrance when presenting it to clients, especially since many of our clients prefer US-based products. We’re pitching Sangfor as part of our solutions, but the presence of Chinese characters might be a concern.

I have been using Sangfor NGAF as a partner for two to three years.

We've encountered various glitches or bugs with the firewall, particularly when trying to configure redundancy. We're facing challenges with setting up two ISPs on a single, stacked firewall.

We haven't encountered any issues scaling with Sangfor. It follows a more traditional approach to scaling, though we don’t yet fully understand all the scaling capabilities of Sangfor products. However, it does have the basic features needed for scaling.

We have some contacts here locally. We do contact them for support.

Sang four independently is easy to configure. It's very straightforward. However, we're having challenges with the interoperability matrix and other integration for other firewall brands. 

The standard configuration, with basic policies, can take a couple of hours to set up.

One guy in our company can do the configuration.

We achieved a lot of ROI since the competitive pricing is much better than the other brands.

Price is very competitive with other brands.

We encounter different glitches or bugs in the firewall. More likely, we're having a problem with two ISPs being cited in our firewall to have redundancy. We don't know the primary or best practice of configuring two ISPs in a single firewall.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

This solution is our firewall. I'm a network administrator.

Sangfor serves most of the basic purposes of a firewall. It's particularly good in the DPI where we can inspect the inbound and outbound traffic on a very granular level. It gives a very good predictive measure as well as the current measure of things going on in our network. When it comes to the VPNs, it has a very good throughput when remote users connect, particularly when it comes to site-to-site VPNs, where it provides a good analysis module. You can analyze inbound traffic and different policies on this. It gives us value for money overall.

I think the GUI needs to be improved, there are a lot of areas where the panes do not make sense. They have put the NAT in the policy section but at the same time the DPI is in the network pane. The placement of different options in the menu system of this firewall is not that logical and often doesn't make a lot of sense. The operational procedures are a little tricky and require some technical skills. A level one person will have problems. The compatibility needs to be improved. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

We have been experiencing power failures but the solution has been very stable, both from the hardware and the software perspective. We have built a lot of VPN solutions for the firewalls including Cisco, Firewall 2, and pfSense, and it has been very good with that. 

We don't require a very highly scalable coefficient but I believe it's scalable. 

The technical support is very good. They have a local vendor they have hired for the technical support and if anything cannot be resolved remotely, they come to us. They are very agile and very technically supportive.

Positive

The initial setup was a little complex because we were previously dealing with command line scenarios and we were not very comfortable with the GUI which is a little complex. 

Our licensing costs are around $15,000 per year which is nominal compared to other solutions. 

Whether or not this solution is good for you depends on your network. If you have sufficient technical support, then you can go for an open-source solution. Without that and if you have the funds, then this is a good solution. If not, then most of what firewalls do these days can be handled by an open-source solution.

This is a new solution in our country where the price tag really matters. They have targeted the public sector and I'm seeing more and more people moving towards Sangfor because it's cheaper than other products, and the support is quite good. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

We have this solution deployed across multiple industries including education, pharmaceutical and different textile industries. This is a good product for network security and is popular right now. Sangfor is cheaper than well-known products like Fortinet and Palo Alto Firewall NGFS.

The level of support provided to local companies is good. They transform their application control and other settings according to that country. 

Sangfor need greater exposer in the market because the market is mainly saturated by Fortinet. The user experience of Fortinet is quite different compared to NGAF. If we want to switch our users from Fortinet to NGAF, we have to convince them that the user experience will be much easier once once they start to use it. 

We have deployed many firewalls and have faced two or three faulty devices that we have to replace over a year because their power supply was faulty. Some customers use the device for over five years and they have worked fine but got slower with the time.

This is a scalable solution. 

I can vouch for the local support team. They are more than competitive in the market. They are always available for small and big customers. They are onsite whenever we need it and assist with any problem or deployment scenario and are willing to discuss it at any time. I would rate them a three out of five. 

I have previously used Fortinet. Fortinet is quite a mature product and offers so many features. Sangfor lack a bit in that area. Sangfor include a local database for URLs and other applications. When using Fortinet, you cannot block a local website by default. 

The simple deployment of a network on NGF is quite simple and their guides are quite simple as well. The do lack visual guides that are easier for some customers to follow. It's easy to configure a normal deployment scenario for networking and ET. When it comes to high level security and highly advanced features, you need to have some experience in that area to actually apply that on this firewall.

If you're experienced, it would take two or three hour maximum, depending on how many customers are using the policy and how much detailed configuration is needed. I would rate our experience with the setup an eight out of ten. 

We have faced some of the issues after deployment with URL filtering which we have logged a ticket for. Our customers are unable to access certain websites. We have diagnosed the problem but we are unable to identify the URL signature or what is blocking the IAM and preventing access to that site. 

For over 2000 users, the cost is around 5000 to 6000 USD. If you want a web application firewall, you have to purchase an additional license for it. By default, they provide you with 10 SSL and a VPN. If you want more than 10, you have to pay more. From a pricing perspective, I would rate them a four out of five.

They have a huge product line for large companies and we have deployed a firewall for over 5000 to 10000 users. It is suitable for all type of environments. I would advise others to spend one to two months after deployment on Sangfor to configure the many settings for security services. You have to work on it, keep looking at the logs and make changes as you go. You need this time to analyze, make future risk assessments and reconfigure the work from time to time. Only once this is done, can you consider deployment complete. 

It offers good value for money and is much cheaper compared to other firewalls. I would suggest Sangfor to those who are cost conscious. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The system comprises three primary functionalities: defense solutions, detection solutions, and the ability to identify, block, and analyze network traffic. 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.

We have observed numerous threats targeting our network from both internal and external sources. While we have reports detailing these incidents, we currently lack a clear method for prioritizing internal threats.

The information provided alerts us to the presence of threats from specific sources, which is highly beneficial.

It does not offer any recommendations on how to mitigate or control attacks.

I have been using it for three years.

We face occasional stability issues. I would rate it seven out of ten.

It doesn't offer significant scalability features.

In the event of a performance issue, such as users reporting slow access to specific websites, we conduct an internal investigation to identify the root cause. If it's determined to be a problem with the equipment, we escalate the issue to the vendor for resolution.

Neutral

When we installed the equipment, we depended on an external consulting party to guide us through the setup and functionality for approximately two weeks. The project team, consisting of both project members and experts in the field, were actively engaged during this period.

The pricing is reasonable. At the time of our decision to acquire the equipment, we were working with a constrained budget and it turned out to be the most suitable choice to meet our specific requirements

We considered FortiGate as an option but ultimately decided on Sangfor NGAF due to its more favorable pricing.

I hope that its distributor possesses a high level of product knowledge, and the same applies to Sangfor itself as the principal company. This would enable customers to have a more seamless and enriching experience with the product, eliminating any barriers or disconnect between our team, the customers, and the software. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

Sangfor NGAF is our gateway to the ISP. We also use it to filter the website that our employees deploy to the firewall and to access to our systems through the web. 

Sangfor reports on any intrusions in real-time so you can immediately whitelist or blacklist these reported intrusions. It makes our work easier because we previously only used MikroTIK which required significant manual effort. 

I really like the SSL VPN. Instead of paying for a virtual private network, we can utilize our own Internet service provider, and use our Internet connection to run access.

For some reason, Sangfor doesn't filter certain websites and applications. It should recognize them and utilize the bandwidth between applications. Also, if we try to block YouTube or Facebook videos, some users will use applications like Siphon for viewing so our bandwidth is still being utilized for non-work purposes. It might detect that somebody is using Siphon, but it cannot be blocked. It's inconsistent, sometimes one user can be blocked while another will have access. 

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The solution is stable and it really protects our systems and the data within our company.  

What we are using now doesn't have the SFP+, only the gigabit ethernet ports. We need to purchase a different model to accommodate the one with SFP+ because what we have now doesn't accommodate additional expansion slots for SFP+. We probably have 100 users who communicate with our head office from outside our region.

We don't encounter a lot of problems but if we do, there is access to 24/7 support, whether it's chat or email support. If there's an issue we make contact. 

Positive

We did not used any network security solutions before

The initial setup was very straightforward and deployment took less than a day. We had one in-house person responsible for deployment and we started using the solution immediately. 

I rate the implementation a nine out of ten.

The setup is a breeze and the pricing is definitely low when compared to the competition.

I looked into Sophos XG.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten.