Sophos Cyberoam UTM Reviews

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.

We work in the finance domain and use the solution for security firewalls. 

I believe it's the advanced security software that offers SMPP protection for the agent.

The reports need to be more detailed and granular. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is stable. 

The product is scalable. It covers 400 endpoints in my company, deployed in multiple locations. 

We contact our local partners for support. 

We have seen ROI with the product's use. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. I think it's very beneficial, especially for our investment in our engineering team, like working on finance. It is beneficial for data privacy and security for our clients.

We are using Cyberoam UTM as our centralized gateway and it is useful for web filtering, application filtering, anti-spam, and IPS.

The most valuable features are the IPS and anti-spam functionality. The application filter is also very good.

The interface is user-friendly.

Web filtering capability that allows the blocking of web sites needs to be implemented.

We have had some issues with technical support, which is an area that needs improvement.

Support for cloud security sandboxing would be a helpful addition to this product.

I have worked with Sophos Cyberoam UTM for about 10 years.

Cyberoam is mostly stable but sometimes there are bugs. During such periods, we have resolved the issues by either rolling back firmware or updating.

Overall, it is a good experience in terms of stability and performance.

We have not had the requirement to scale because it has been more than enough for us. We have about 300 users and have not had any issues in terms of performance.

The speed of response from technical support is very good. However, the solution that they gave us was not working afterward. We implemented the solution and did not get the desired result.

We did not use another similar product prior to Cyberoam.

It is very easy to implement and configure.

Our in-house team was responsible for the deployment.

There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

This product is going to be at the end of life this year, so we are going to be looking at other devices and other vendors. The best product that we have tested so far is from Fortinet. My second choice would be Sophos UTM.

My advice is that if Cyberoam continues in the future then it is a product I recommend. However, my understanding is that the product will no longer be available next year.

For people who want to migrate from Cyberoam, the best option that we have seen so far is from Fortinet.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The product’s most valuable feature is a centralized dashboard. It can manage firewalls, endpoints, wireless devices, and switches from a single console. We can synchronize old firewalls, antivirus, wireless, and switches.

The product’s pricing has increased by approximately 45% in four months. This particular area needs improvement.

We have an in-house technical support team, including three to four engineers. We reach out to the product’s support team in cases of software- or hardware-related issues.

The product is worth the investment.

The product’s pricing is expensive. It could be reduced. Most customers purchase its three-year license due to cost savings compared to a year license.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten.

We use Cyberoam UTM as a firewall. 

I like the SSL VPN connection. Cyberoam works well for controlling users and authenticating their connection to the internet. 

I have used Cyberoam UTM for about five years. 

We haven't had any issues with Cyberoam so far. 

I rate Cyberoam UTM eight out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate Cyberoam support nine out of 10. We rely mostly on consultants for support. 

Positive

The setup is a bit complex, so we needed help from a consultant. It took us about two months to configure the security policies and ensure everything was in alignment. 

We use this solution to serve as a captive portal for staff to authenticate before they gain access to the network.

The most valuable features are the firewall section, the VPN, and how you control live users. 

The interface is good.

So far, I have not encountered any problems.

I am not happy with my last pricing experience. The pricing could be better.

I would like to see real-time alerts on traffic insights.

I have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for three years.

It's a stable product. We have not experienced any crashes or bugs.

I haven't tried to scale it yet.

I have contacted technical support once and the experience was seamless. They walked me through the right rules to create. Everything went well.

The initial setup was a bit complex. Over time, I grew and I could navigate around everywhere. It's pretty easy to find what you are looking for.

The implementation only takes a couple of hours to complete.

We used an agent to help us with the implementation.

We do all of the maintenance in-house. 

For any solution that has to pass through Sophos, we do the firewall configuration ourselves.

I am not happy with the pricing, it could be better.

We did not evaluate other solutions because we knew that we wanted to use this one.

This is a product that I could recommend to others if they had a direct contact with Sophos.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for operating system security.

The geofencing and report blocking are the solution's most valuable aspects.

The solution is quite stable. The performance has been good overall.

The product is at its end-of-life. There is nothing to improve as it will be discontinued.

With technology such a Sophos, Palo Alto, and Fortinet there has always been a lot of online documentation, which Cyberoam always lacked.

We started using the solution in 2016 or 2017. It's been a few years.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite good overall. We find it reliable.

I haven't worked on scaling the solution, and therefore can't speak from personal experience on how well it would expand or how easy it would be. Our company is not in the process of expanding it out, either.

We have about 100 user on the solution currently.

The technical support was always good, however, it was never as good as the technical support offered by Sophos. They could have been more helpful and responsive. They could have been better at sharing information. However, it doesn't matter anymore, as we are moving on to Sophos.

We are now moving over to Sophos, as this solution is obsolete.

The initial setup is not complex. It's quite straightforward. A company wouldn't typically have any issues rolling it out.

I cannot recall how long our deployment took, exactly. It's been a few years since the process happened.

We did not require assistance from outside contractors when we did our initial implementation. We handled it in-house. We did not hire consultants or integrators.

The solution wasn't overly expensive. If you are covering your company from security risk, it's often worth the cost. Security solutions aren't something you want to cheap out on.

We're typically using the latest version of the solution. We update our policies every three years and continue to update them. 

The product is obsolete and we have moved over to Sophos.

Generally, I would tend to recommend Sophos XE to users.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.