Sophos Cyberoam UTM Reviews

Sophos Cyberoam UTM works as a firewall to prevent unwanted traffic on the office premises.

The most valuable feature of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is the SD-WAN gateway.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM could have a more advanced reporting function.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM should include email security.

I have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for seven to eight years.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a stable solution. I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM ten out of ten for stability.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is scalable enough. Approximately 200 users are using Sophos Cyberoam UTM in our organization. I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten for scalability.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM's technical support team responds immediately, but sometimes they take longer to respond.

Positive

Sophos Cyberoam UTM's initial setup is easy. I rate the solution's initial setup a ten out of ten. The solution's deployment was like plug-and-play.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM pricing is at the mid-segment level. Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a cost-efficient solution compared to other solutions. I rate the solution a two out of ten for pricing.

We're working with the 18.5 version of Sophos Cyberoam UTM, and the model number is XG 135.

When you buy any hardware, you need to buy licenses for the user base to create unlimited users. However, with Sophos Cyberoam UTM, you can create an unlimited number of users since it has no limitations. While other OEMs charge for SSL VPN clients, Sophos Cyberoam does not charge for SSL VPN.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a good product, but we may face a bug issue when they implement new firmware.

Overall, I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten.

Primary use is monitoring. Having a reporting console to monitor the usage of bandwidth. That's the prime concern.

Let's talk about connecting the branches to the central headquarters. That has really improved our functioning, because we were really facing trouble with remote locations. What we had before was a decentralized mechanism in our organization, but after having this product we were able to get the remote locations into the same LAN. We were able to control the bandwidth and were able to take virtual access of those machines and give them the support, as and when required.

The best feature is the flexibility the product offers, in terms of remote access. We have bout 35 locations across the kingdom, and connecting those remote locations with the minimal bandwidth was a challenge. A few of my branches are connected via 3G. So that is the most advanced feature I like about Cyberoam, the flexibility the solution offers.

There is a lot or room for improvement, because it is still not a fourth or fifth generation firewall. It lacks security features. I would say security is something that is not that appealing in this product, so that's where they can improve.

There were no issues with stability.

I'm not sure about scalability because the number of users I had was approximately 250 and the headquarters model, which is CR300iNG, supports about 350 users. The threshold was good, so I did not find any major issues with it.

Average, average, average. Their customer service has to be improved a lot, especially the ticketing mechanism they have. First we do have to first raise a ticket, wait for their availability. And the people, I found they don't have much knowledge, so normally a lot of escalations after which the issue gets resolved.

Earlier, I was using Cisco ICER. I switched because it's not a UTM box, and it requested a lot of add-ons, when it comes to flexibility of those devices. For example, if I needed to extend my user limit, every time I need to purchase a slot and increase the firmware. That was not so appealing. That is the reason I switched to the new, next-generation UTM firewall.

It was very user friendly. It was a straightforward integration. We had no issues. In fact, no system integrator deployed it. We did it ourselves.

It is worth the value. 

I did evaluate FortiGate.

The first drawback is that Sophos has acquired Cyberoam. So, if I was a new customer who wanted to choose between Cyberoam and Sophos, I would definitely go for Cyberoam because it has additional features in it. I don't understand the strategy behind it, because the same owner has two different products under one umbrella. It's a bit confusing.

Six out of ten is the best I can rate Cyberoam at this moment. To get it to a 10, it's up to the manufacturer. They need to really upgrade their firmware to match up with the fourth or fifth generation firewalls that other vendors have to offer. My advice would be that the manufacturer needs to focus on security.

I reside in a small country with no particular big companies or leading businesses. The solution is mostly used in small to medium-sized companies. If the solution is used in big companies, a couple of thousands of users use the solution.

It provides the first layer of protection against any kind of attack. It is also important to note that Sophos UTM is easy to use for the end customer. Along with its endpoint and server software, provides synchronized security as its endpoint solution connects with network protection to provide a multi-layered defense to users.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a very strong product with good support. I haven't faced any significant issues during the time I have worked with Sophos.

Network visibility of the connections is an area in the solution where improvements can be made.

I have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for more than ten years. My company sells the solution in Uruguay, and we have had a partnership with Sophos since 2001, which was even before Sophos entered the UTM market.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

My company even deals with those customers who use other brands like Fortinet or Check Point.

The initial setup of the product was straightforward.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The return on investment that I see from the use of Sophos Cyberoam UTM is good.

I consider Sophos Cyberoam UTM to be a competitively-priced product. Since my company has a partnership with Sophos we can achieve good pricing when facing the competence.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We are resellers, so when organizations need UTM devices and network security at the gateway level to secure their networks, we recommend and resell this product. 

Our customers find it economical and offers good security. These two features are key. Ease of installation and implementation are also key factors.

Improvements are mostly needed on the technical side to enhance security and ease of management. 

Additionally, the reporting part could be more user-friendly for troubleshooting and identifying network issues. It should be more easy for a normal user to identify the problem in their network. So, the reporting part has room for improvement.

I've been working with Cyberoam UTM for the past two to three years.

The product is very stable.

I haven't faced scalability issues, so it's a scalable solution. Our customers are mostly small and medium-sized businesses.

There have been some technical issues, but they are mostly related to the technical aspects. Sometimes, our customers need support, and our technical team provides assistance. We also occasionally seek support from Sophos's team online.

While there's always room for improvement, the support is currently good.

Neutral

The initial installation takes about 15 to 20 minutes. However, implementing policies may take longer, depending on the number and type of users. But the basic installation is quick, around 15 to 20 minutes.

For the initial installation, one person is sufficient. However, our team comprises three to four people who handle support and installations.

It's easy to maintain. One person can handle the maintenance, but our team provides support and maintenance services.

It's an economical solution, so pricing is not an issue.

I have worked with solutions like UTM firewalls for network solutions and wireless solutions for campus Wi-Fi. So, solutions related to Wi-Fi and networking.

I would definitely recommend it.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. Overall, it's an excellent product. I only see room for improvement in the reporting part.

We use Cyberoam just like a VPN, usually as a VPN channel.

I like the reliability and the price. But sometimes, my customer asks for cheaper solutions, though I propose we focus on reliability.

Aside from that, the port forwarding is good. Sometimes you hold some servers on-premise, and then you can have someone access another country or anywhere. The VPN is also good.

The blocking needs to be improved. Sometimes we need to block YouTube, Facebook, or something like that, and then we need to optimize our Internet. The Internet in the Philippines is very bad, and it's kind of expensive if you want a high-speed connection. We're getting to the next generation, but we must improve our Internet. We then have to make policies where users cannot access certain websites to optimize the Internet because sites like YouTube take a lot of latency, especially on HD. But sometimes Cyberoam doesn't work like that, and we must use another third-party solution like Trend Micro. Trend Micro does the job, but Cyberoam should be the one that does the job because it's the firewall itself. Cyberoam needs to improve that kind of security blockage.

I have used Cyberoam UTM for three months.

The firewall doesn't need any maintenance. We just have to leave it in the data center in a very cold environment. I have never experienced a firewall failing, and I have been working for almost 12 years. We can pay for maintenance since it's already included in the service.

It's not scalable, but that depends on the budget and hardware. The firewall does scale between 100 to 200 users, but that depends on the model.

The service could be improved here in the Philippines. We don't have a lot of problems with the US team for Cyberoam.

The initial setup is very easy because the GUI is easy for me to use. 

Deployment is very easy, we just have to connect to the ISP we have, set the support load balancing, and then we just have to connect to our core switches. Then we have to distribute it to any of the other users. The deployment can be done solo because there is a setup wizard. We can configure the settings and then put a static IP address through the ISP, but it's very easy.

With good security, you can expect it to be expensive. Cyberoam's pricing depends on the services you subscribe for. Most firewalls right now, especially UTM, focus on services and stagger all the services. If you want a particular service, you pay for it.

We don't have a lot of problems with Cyberoam. We don't face any issues if the IT or security administrators have a lot of experience. We can easily configure any firewall or security solution without any bugs. But I'm sure I won't encounter any bugs, unlike with Cisco.

I cannot recommend Cyberoam because navigating the graphical user interface is very difficult. It's not so familiar. I'm not gonna recommend it unless there's someone who already knows how to use firewalls. I used to focus on Cisco firewalls, but the Cisco firewall is much harder than Cyberoam. If you're going with Cyberoam, that's good because every security administrator or any information technology manager knows how to recommend the latest trends. Cyberoam is not the top trend in the Philippines.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I am using the solution mostly internally for security, a firewall and internet. We have a lot of users with many user policies. Additionally, we use it for a DOS-specific file exchange.

The solution is easy to integrate.

I had an issue when I was trying to stop a user from using too much bandwidth while I was using Azure, I was not able to stop them. You normally can just right click and block them but in this solution, it was not working in the firewall settings.

I have been using the solution for 10 years.

I was running the solution for seven years and I did not have issues. I would rate the stability a four out of five.

For a medium-sized organization, the scalability was good.

The support was good. Whenever I needed to contact to support to create tickets, they contact me within a reasonable time and they resolved the issues.

The setup was easy.

On a yearly basis, it cost me approximately $1,500. While having 400 users and comparing the price to other solutions, what I was paying yearly was good.

Cyberoam is going to end this year. They already have announced last year if you are an enterprise and have the support it will end.

What I have learned from using this solution is when choosing another product in the future I will do more technical feature comparisons. Having done the comparisons I most likely would not have been having some of the issues I was having because I would have gone with another solution.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM a seven out of ten.

I use it for security, web management, content management, VPN, and site-to-site VPN. I use many features of the firewalls, like intrusion prevention system, antivirus, anti-spam, etc. I use almost every aspect of the firewalls.

It has performed perfectly fine, so far.

The benefits are the firewall.

The performance and security are the best features.

The security options are great. We never had an attack, which is pretty good. We use it from a standard location, and they are connected to each other. 

I am not sure there will be a another release of Cyberoam because it will be Sophos going forward. What could be included going forward though? I would like to see a better content management pack and also the website searching should be better.

We have never had to restart a firewall. The firewalls have all worked perfectly fine.

Scalability is good, if you get good models. I have never had a problem with scalability.

The technical support from Turkey is very good. I would rate them a 10 out of 10.

Cyberoam still supports their old product. Though, the NG theories are not supported anymore.

We started with Cyberoam. We did not switch from anything else.

Before it was Linux machines, but for the service, we switched over to Cyberoam for performance purposes. 

The initial setup was done before my time.

After I started at the company, I have continue doing set ups with my assistants. Sometimes, we get external help. Mostly, we do the setup that we want, because previously it was straightforward and easy to use.

Prices are very high.

There were quite a number of vendors in our original shortlist. We chose Cyberoam because it was the leading firewall brand in the world. It still is. We chose it because of its worldwide usage and wide knowledge base on the Internet, and also the positive reviews of its users.

Now, we are trying to evaluate the different brands because Cyberoam was acquired by Sophos, and we are not sure how Cyberoam will evolve in the next few years. Usually in five years, the acquiring company completely acquires their technology and adapts their technology into their own brand and keep on with their brand. So, it seems like Sophos will keep on providing the firewall solution instead of Cyberoam and the Cyberoam brand will eventually disappear.

This is why we are trying to find a proactive solution to get the most support, upgrades, product improvements, etc. This is why we are evaluating whether to migrate over to Sophos or Fortigate, and I have been having a hard time choosing whether to replace all of my Cyberoam products with Sophos or move them over to FortiGate.

I am rating it a 10 out of 10 because it has never failed us.

Talk to people who are actually using it. Actual experience always differs from the product advertisement.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

• Market share
• Ease of use
• Best practices
• Comments of different users from different companies of the product.

Before I purchase anything, I go onto web and do thorough research about:

• What the product can offer.
• What are the challenges.
• What are the properties of that product that makes our IT people's lives easier.
• What happens if something goes wrong.
• How fast I can get support.
• What are its internet support options?

Sometimes, if a product is used widely, you do not even have to call anyone in support. The answers are all over the Internet. For example, if you are using a Microsoft product, you don't even have to call Microsoft, because the Internet is growing with Microsoft articles about how to do and what to do when there are issues. If you are using a very limited operating system, like a Mac operating system, Mac OS. It's not very common, so you need to get professional help.

UTM is a full content management. Content blocking, URL blocking, etc. We also use it to manage video and streaming media for the subscriber. So it's for internet usage, basically.

Before, I was using TMG, and it was very difficult, back in 2010. A lot of things, like HTTP filtering and HTTPS filtering, were a problem for me at the time. If someone asked me to block YouTube for example, I was able to do so in TMG but when it came to HTTPS, I was having some problems. So this is one issue we have resolved.

The second issue, before the firewall, was we only published our required port on the internet.

Third, email filtering. Before, because we were using Go Daddy services, just normal services for email, we had everything coming in. Now, we also filter emails. 

For me, the most important thing is content management and, obviously, the firewall because we have some servers.

We have different levels of users. Some users, we are just giving them email access. For some users, working sites only. For some users, we are giving them intermediate access so they can access, on the government side, some knowledge bases. For some users, we are giving full access.

So there are two major features for me. One is content management and the second thing is servers, publishing.

They have some issues with email filtering. Sometimes, I have found emails that have passed through the firewall, so I contacted Cyberoam. They said, "Okay, we are going to update the signature in the next update you, you will not get it like this again."

It's stable.

Yes, it can handle growth.

I have called them many times. On a scale of one to five, I would rate them four.

I rate them four because lot of times they don't resolve issues. They are just saying, "Okay send the signature, we will update it." Most of the time they are not giving me the solutions. After three or four conversations, they come to understand it is not available and they say they will update it.

We were using TMG, previously. As I mentioned, we were not able to filter email. The second thing was content management. Sometimes we have to block HTTPS. We have to inspect a URL with HTTPS. In TMG, it was problematic because we needed the certificate and other things.

Also, at the time I was publishing servers' URLs. We have some internal services for our users. TMG was handling it, but it was an old tool in 2010. There were no updates. 

I chose Cyberoam, because, at the time we had a problem with the budget. I had a minimal budget and it fit my budget.

If someone knows how firewalls work, they can easily manage it. I don't think it's complex.

I checked Fortinet but it was a little expensive at that time for me. We also looked at Cisco but it was expensive. So at that time the two products we compared, because they were easily available in our area, were Fortinet and Cyberoam. And Cyberoam was cheaper at that time.

For a small business, it's okay. It's easy to set up and it's also cheap.

I rate it eight out of 10. I'm not giving a 10 because many times, I have problems with the email filtering. Emails pass through without any filtering affecting them. When I get back to them and tell them this is the issue, they check everything and say it is not in their database signature and they have to update it. But you know, by that time, my user has already opened it. 

I don't know why they are not updating. Every time, it seems they are waiting for me to inform them that this is the signature issue or this is the signature that came in through that filter.