Sophos Cyberoam UTM Reviews

Site to Site VPN, and local web filtering.

The ability to have a site to site VPN, yet have the users use their local internet rather than sending all traffic back to our main site is crucial to their day to day operations. Remote VOIP phone system routing through the VPN we have extension connections to those remote campuses.

We have issues with IPS and DoS attacks taking down a couple of our sites. I've changed the IPs of the external interfaces yet the attacks still happen and the Firewall will disconnect the VPN connection as well as stop all internal traffic from flowing externally. I am still able to HTTPS to the external interface, but it takes a full reboot of the appliance to get any traffic flowing again.

Deployment only has one snag. Our VOIP system initially tried to communicate over the internet before the VPN connection is active. Once that happened, unsuccessfully, the phone switch stops trying. But support was able to diagnose the problem and come up with a solution to keep traffic blocked going to the internet, causing it to wait for the VPN to be active and traffic flow successfully.

Seems like the main instability I have found is with my Austin site and the DoS attacks that take down the VPN and internet ability for the local site. I have 7 remote sites and this is the only one that has these issues regularly.

Yes, currently with the Sophos buy out of Cyberoam. My CR15iNG models show not to be upgradable to the new Sophos IOS. Meaning I have to purchase new equipment to get any of the new features and performance. Causing me to investigate other firewalls.

I have always had great luck with customer service. I have been with them for so long that they know me and are pretty responsive to any issues I've had. I have had hardware issues in the past and received a replacement the next day. I've also been on the phone for quite some time for them to diagnose an issue I have and come up with a good solution. While their support is not in the US, I have not had a problem getting someone on the phone when I call.

There is always another level. First level of support is very capable of helping with configuration issues. While when something more complicated is in need they have engineers to speak with and view your appliance to be sure they have all the information and diagnose appropriately.

We used Cisco firewalls prior. They worked great, were more complicated to setup and cost significantly more initially and to renew each year.

Very straightforward for setup. I had a few issues with my VOIP setup but once that was figured out setup for all other sites was a snap.

In-House deployment.

Much less travel expense. Even when I have issues, as with my Austin site, I'm able to rectify them remotely in most cases. With the Cisco I had to travel if I was needing to change the configuration.

These, CR15iNG remote/small office firewalls, units are pretty inexpensive and renewal pricing is well worth the support cost. They do not have a hardware replacement support agreement at this time with Cyberoam. I do believe Sophos is changing that portion of the support agreement though.

Not really, we had the Cisco in place. We had a vendor at the time that was really high on Cyberoam as they have done the evaluation of others for us.

I liked the product so much I purchased one for my home as well.

Prior to Sophos taking over I had a great sales support staff and technical staff. Since that has lagged a bit. I'm hoping that with my upgrade to the Sophos OS that will change, if I stay with their product.

The solution had a feature to import users from a CSV file. However, the latest version does not have that option. 

The tool is stable. 

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is scalable. 

The tool's technical support is good. 

Positive

Sophos Cyberoam UTM's setup is easy and takes around two to three days to complete. 

Sophos Cyberoam UTM has many price schemes. 

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. You need to enable security features and rules with the firewall. 

We use the solution solely to configure the web app filter. 

Security comes with multiple default IPs, which allows things to be done immediately, within only two to three minutes. 

The solution has very good performance. 

The solution is user-friendly. 

While the security features are excellent, they could be improved. 

We have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for around four to five years.

The solution is already scalable.

Technical support is excellent.

It took around 30 minutes to complete the entire configuration.

The same team is used for the deployment and maintenance. 

The solution is cheap in comparison with Sophos. 

It comes with a yearly licensing fee. 

We have around 20 clients using the solution, but have migrated 10 of them to Sophos.

We recommend the solution to others. 

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM as a ten out of ten. 

We are using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for network protection.

There are plenty of features available, such as Full Guard and WAN. 

The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing.

I have been using this solution for approximately 15 years.

The solution is stable, we have not had any bugs or issues.

The solution is good for medium-sized businesses.

I have used many other network protection solutions, such as Fortinet.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten.

We primarily use Cyberoam for securing our network. We also use it for VPN.

It is not possible for anyone to enter our network until after they are able to log in, which is the most fascinating aspect for me.

The user interface is well laid out and understandable.

Sometimes, users are timed out intermittently.

We have had trouble logging into the firmware.

We have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for almost 10 years.

This is a stable product.

Cyberoam UTM is a scalable solution. Everyone on our network uses it, so it protects the whole organization. There are perhaps 300 or 400 people.

The customer support is wonderful. We only had to contact Sophos once. They helped us and it was awesome.

The first time you configure the device, you may find it complex. However, in time, you will see that it is simple. It's well laid out and fine to use. The deployment will take approximately a week.

We implemented in-house and when we experienced problems, we contacted the reseller to assist.

We paid for a two-year FullGuard license that includes support.

Cyberoam will be reaching end-of-life in two years, so we will be moving to something else. We think that if we upgrade to Sophos XG, some of the problems that we are having could go away.

Our experience with this product so far has been wonderful. Everything about it is fine and I would recommend it to everyone. That said, there is always improvement that one can make at all times.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a security device. You can use it for unified threat management, advanced threat protection, and sandboxing.

I like Sophos Cyberoam UTM as a security component or device for organizations. Performance-wise, it's a satisfactory solution, and it works okay. It also has good features.

What needs improvement in Sophos Cyberoam UTM is openness in the competition among Sophos partners or any other Sophos product.

Another area for improvement in the solution is pricing. It could be cheaper.

I've been working with Sophos Cyberoam UTM since I started the company.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a stable solution.

The scalability of Sophos Cyberoam UTM depends on the organization's needs at different points in time.

I've never contacted the technical support for Sophos Cyberoam UTM because I have twenty-five years of experience with user solutions.

There wouldn't be an issue deploying Sophos Cyberoam UTM or any other UTM device for technical people because the basic concept remains the same for all vendors.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM needs cheaper pricing.

I have an IT company where I provide end-to-end IT infrastructure from servers to security products, firewalls to UTMs, including WiFi solutions.

I've provided Sophos Cyberoam UTM to a couple of customers.

I'm a technical solutions provider, and my team deploys solutions for customers.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM can be deployed on-premises and on the cloud.

I'd recommend Sophos Cyberoam UTM, but it would depend on the customer's requirements. The best product I recommend depends on the market report and how the customer interaction or experience evolved with a particular product. Still, Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a product I'd recommend.

My rating for Sophos Cyberoam UTM is six out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for its firewall capabilities. We use it to make a firewall for the network and the two main computers as well as our web pages. 

The solution works really well overall.

It's quite easy to configure everything, which is a great selling point for us. You can easily adjust the users and load balances, for example. We can make our own rules and input as many as we like. 

The firewall is very good. It provides a nice amount of security.

The solution has good load balancers.

We've found the solution to be very stable.

So far, we've found the scalability to be acceptable.

The installation process is pretty easy.

A user needs to do some training on the solution in order to take full advantage of the product.

There needs to be more documentation that users can access to help them understand the solution or troubleshoot as necessary. Right now, this is lacking quite a bit.

Beyond that, there aren't really any missing features that I can recall. I can't speak to what I would like to see in a future release.

The stability of the solution is quite good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and offers us a good performance. 

The product is quite scalable. If a company needs to scale it up, it can do so. It's not a problem.

We have at least 500 users on the product currently.

I don't have any experience with technical support. I have never used them and therefore can't speak to how responsive or knowledgeable they might be.

We used to use Kerio Control. I actually liked using it, however, we only had it for about eight or nine months before moving off of it. That said, I didn't have the skills to manage the solution properly.

We have found the initial installation process to be straightforward and easy. It's not overly complex or difficult. A company should be able to manage it rather easily.

If you connect it then you can adjust the web page and the IP and you can make a batch configuration. Then you can simply connect to the tower. It's not hard.

The deployment maybe took three or so hours. It wasn't a long amount of time. That includes handling all of the configurations as well.

We have five members that make up a technical team that can handle deployment and maintenance. Two are administrators. One is a security admin and the other is a network admin. Those are the two that mostly manage everything and have the rights to do so.

At the time, we used a consultant to assist us in the process. They were quite knowledgeable and helped a lot.

We pay for licensing the solution. It's my understanding that it is not overly expensive. It may be somewhere around $2,000 for a license. 

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using.

I'd recommend the solution.

I would rate it at least a seven out of ten. It's a pretty good solution and we're mostly happy with it.

I am using it as a firewall for getting the internet for our users. I am using CR100i, which is an old model. I am going to replace this one.

Its portal is user-friendly. I am able to manage the user data and access control through this device.

It should have better VPN protection. Some of the VPN applications are not blocked by this firewall. Some VPNs are able to get through this firewall, which is why I am planning to replace this firewall with a good one in the near future.

I have been using this solution for the last five years.

It is stable.

It is easy to scale. There are no problems or issues with it. 

We have two administrators and 200 users. Out of these, 70 users are contract users.

We didn't face any issues with it so far.

I have used Cisco ASA, which is a different product. This is a UTM device, whereas Cisco ASA is purely a firewall. Some of the features that are available in this solution, such as user activities, user values management, and user time active, are not there in Cisco ASA. 

Its initial setup is simple.

The first installation was done by the integrator. In terms of maintenance, at one time, there was a problem with the hardware of the device, and a memory part wasn't configured. They had replaced this memory. That was the only issue we had.

It is a cheap firewall. We are not paying for any license.

I would recommend this solution. It is a good solution for an entry-level firewall. It is not suitable for large data center networks.

I would rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM a nine out of ten.