SonicWall NSa Reviews

SonicWall prevents and restricts access to websites for employees as well as anyone who comes into the office.

Most firewalls have active/active high-availability mode. If I'm paying for two firewalls, why shouldn't AI utilize both? It would be better if SonicWall came with n active/active feature instead of active/standby.

I've been working with SonicWall NSa for more than five years.

SonicWall NSa is simple to scale. You can easily add more firewalls to the cluster.

SonicWall's sales support is much better than other vendors'. 

Deploying SonicWall NSa is straightforward. A new user can easily configure the firewall. You can usually complete the deployment within a day. Setting up the prerequisites takes about two hours and then it takes some time to deploy the policies. That varies depending on what the customer wants. 

Maintenance is primarily configuration-related stuff, and our customers have their own engineers, but we give them advice. One engineer can maintain the solution.

You don't need to pay an annual fee, but any cost matters to the customer. Let's say SonicWall is giving me a firewall at a certain price, while a FortiGate firewall costs the same but offers added features like free SSL and active/active. Then customers might think it's better to buy a FortiGate.

Competitors provide SSL encryption licenses for free, whereas SonicWall only provides two licenses by default, but you have to pay for the rest of the licenses.
However, when most customers go beyond 20 or so users with SSL licenses, they usually go with a dedicated appliance, so a firewall should provide at least 20 to 25 SSL licenses for free.

I rate SonicWall NSa eight out of 10.

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.

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.

In the main office we have set up a SonicWall TZ device, and then from the branches, we have set up a lower branch model, the SonicWall, and then created site-to-site VPN. We then deployed the VoIP between those branches to the main office. We also deployed the firewall and the URL filtering between sites and the main office. So, we just enabled and created the different DMZ zones from the devices.

We have utilized all the features. The most valuable are the:

• URL filtering by category,
• DMZ zoning
• Load balancing
• The site-to-site VPN.
  

Because this is an old device, the throughput needs to improve. Right now, the only problem is that since it eight years devices had to keep up with the latest technology. Most of the devices are now linked to the plants. That is one thing that can be improved. 

We also need to increase the throughput because the other devices are slower. The throughput will become slow. Since we're using VoIP, it tends to affect the voice quality. Even if you're using a quality service, it tends to decrease.

We're going to replace them. Since this is already eight years old, so we're going to replace the hardware but with a different brand.

We have been using this solution for ten years. 

It's deployed from the main office to the site office. So, we're using site-to-site VPN between project sites since we are a construction company.

There is no problem with the stability. Since the very start, I have not experienced any problem yet until recently during the quarantine, but the problem is now resolved. Since the requirement is to have a voice quality, we're using a platform like MS Team, Zoom, and it does not perform well when using those applications.

We have around 100 to 200-people using it. Most of them are users. It's on around 10 projects or 10 branches.

We only require one staff member for the deployment and maintenance. 

I have never called support. I only called when we first purchased it, if I had a question. I have not found any difficulties when contacting them, or just because I contacted only lower support. Then since it is a user-friendly solution, I didn't experience any problems with the device.

We used Fortinet and Juniper NetScreen, but we already replaced them.

After seven years or five years, the performance degraded. Then we sourced from our local suppliers and got a recommendation from them and er also checked IT Central Station to compare each product. 

It's not hard to configure, it's user-friendly. It's very user-friendly. It's just the performance that's an issue because it has already aged out. It is already old.

The quality and security support should be improved in the next release.

I would rate SonicWall NSA an eight out of ten. 

I am using SonicWall NSa as a firewall for many of its functionality, such as intrusion detection and traffic control.

The most valuable feature of SonicWall NSa is the control aspect of the solution.

The detection of malware can improve in SonicWall NSa.

I have been using SonicWall NSa for approximately seven years.

SonicWall NSa is stable.

The scalability of SonicWall NSa is good.

We have approximately 2000 employees and 6000 students using the solution. We have plans to increase the usage of the solution in the future.

The support is mostly online that we have received from SonicWall NSa.

I rate the support from SonicWall NSa a four out of five.

We did not use another firewall previously.

The initial setup of SonicWall NSa is straightforward. The full deployment took approximately two weeks.

We had an integrator do the implementation of SonicWall NSa for us.

I am the only one who maintains the solution.

SonicWall NSa is a straightforward firewall appliance, and most of the features are available.

I rate SonicWall NSa a nine out of ten.

SonicWall is for general security purposes.

SonicWall has all the usual functions, like LAN configurations, security features, word filters, etc., but it also has the CFS agent, which isn't available in any other firewall. Reporting port support is also there.

I also like the ability to manage all the firewalls from a single location. We can support all those things from this application. It's a cloud-based solution.

The thing main thing is that there's no user admin and in other firewalls, we can enable the scalable features, but SonicWall doesn't have that feature. 

I've used SonicWall for about seven years.

SonicWall NSa is reliable.

It's cloud-based, so the scalability is good, and it's suitable for any size of customer.

SonicWall support is good. I rate it 10 out of 10.

Positive

SonicWall NSa is easy to understand. The initial setup for any firewall is straightforward. Having a single console is also good. The deployment time can vary depending on the client's requirements, like VPNs, routing, policies, load balancing, etc. At most, it will take one hour. I rate it 10 out of 10 for ease of setup. After deployment, SonicWall doesn't require specific maintenance. 

We are resellers, so the clients who purchase the firewall deploy it themselves. We provide support, too.

I rate SonicWall NSa nine out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution for security. It's used as a firewall.

The solution is very stable.

It's an excellent product for an SMB.

The filtering is excellent.

The solution is quite stable.

We found the initial setup to be straightforward.

You can scale the solution to a certain extent.

The product likely isn't a good fit for a large organization.

They need to elaborate on their business from a technical point of view. 

I've been working with the solution for about four or more years at this point. It's been a while. 

The product scales quite well. There are no bugs. It's not glitchy. It doesn't crash or freeze. I find it to be reliable. 

You can scale the solution. We haven't used it beyond 1,000 to 1,500 users. Beyond that, I'm not sure what it can handle. I haven't really tried to scale it too much.

I've also used Palo Alto. I used it at my previous organization.

We found the initial setup to be very straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. A company should have any problem with the process.

We're a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with SonicWall.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. While we've been mostly happy with it, it's more for SMBs as opposed to larger organizations.

I'd recommend the product to small organizations for sure.

We are using SonicWall NSa as a network firewall and for segmentation on internal networks. We are using this firewall on the application level ID. We are using it for specific segmentation between production LANs and between technologies.

Overall SonicWall NSa is a good solution for our use case.

The solution's price could be reduced. It is expensive.

I have been using SonicWall NSa for approximately four years.

SonicWall NSa is highly stable.

The scalability of SonicWall NSa is good. We have approximately 2,000 users using it.

I did not use the support from SonicWall NSa.

We have used other solutions such as pfSense and Linux native firewalls. I prefer SonicWall NSa but if you are going to use something for an enterprise you need another solution.

We have been using the solution for many years which has made the initial setup easy for us.

SonicWall NSa is worth the money we paid.

The price of SonicWall NSa is expensive.

The solution does not require a lot of maintenance. We have a specific team now for all technology, all for all infrastructure technologies.

I rate SonicWall NSa a seven out of ten.