Sophos Cyberoam UTM Reviews

We use Sophos Cyberoam UTM to protect company networks from attacks from the internet and to separate internal networks into different nodes. The Intrusion Prevention system of Sophos Cyberoam UTM protects different networks from attacks from other networks. This includes the company's network or from the outside of the company's networks.

There are plenty of features that are valuable in the Sophos Cyberoam UTM. We use all the features, such as email Security, firewall rules, web server security, web devices, web protection.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM could improve by adding VPN site-to-site capabilities. The correct version does not work with Microsoft Azure Cloud.

I have been using Sophos Cyberoam UTM for approximately 18 years.

Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a very stable solution and it's a well-formed and clear-built solution. You can easily have flexibility in configuring. The Sophos XG has a strong connection to the cloud and that's not good for security.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 30 customers using this solution. We support other IT service providers who don't have knowledge about IT security.

The installation is straightforward. The length of time it takes for the implementation can vary drastically based on the organization's network structure. Addiotnanly, how well the organizations want to be protected. An easy installation can be done in two to three hours, and other implementations need much more time to prepare the firewall or to create an object. Adding more complexity to the installation can add one to three days.

The technical team that is needed to support the solution depends on the size of the organization. For smaller companies, we only need one technical engineer on our side and IT support from the customer. Larger companies with substantial-sized departments need much more support personnel. Additionally, we need one person from the management because we have to prepare outage times.

There are many options for payment of the subscription license. You purchase a subscription every one, two, or three years. You can also have monthly subscriptions but we typically offer subscriptions for three years because from the financial perspective it is better to have a three-year subscription.

We don't like Cloud solutions in the IT security area. Firewalls feature critical infrastructures, such as networks. We don't advise our customers to use Cloud solutions.

I would recommend Sophos Cyberoam UTM.

I rate Sophos Cyberoam UTM an eight out of ten.

The majority of it is on-premise protecting the external to internal and then we utilize the features inside the Cyberoam XG series like their IPS and their web application firewall to do the filtering as well as their proxy server inside the application control.

I'm more inclined towards the conventional firewall. So for me, I'm more geared towards the standard firewall type functionalities as well as the web application firewall because that seems to work fine.

I would say there's room for improvement in terms of the GUI. Because it is better than some of the other standard firewalls. They have the drag and drop features.

Also, their logging systems need improvement because their logging systems sometimes look a bit complicated if you're not familiar with it.

We have been using Sophos since the XG version, so around four to five years. 

It's quite stable. When they first started out with the XG series it was a bit buggy but after a few releases, it became quite stable.

The XG series is much better compared to the previous UTM. Because with the XG series you can actually approach the enterprise level. Previously we tried to go for these large enterprises when we talked about the Sophos Firewall. When they moved to Cyberoam XG series Firewall they were much more scalable and they're much more robust compared to earlier ones. 

Most of our clients are enterprise-size. We have one customer that's using almost about 200 units of the XG series firewall. Then we have other customers using it on their larger network, so they cater to about 300 to almost 500 users

I don't have any problems with technical support so far because any time I ever contacted technical support it was for a major issue. Other than that I don't have any issues with technical support.

I previously worked with Nokia, Checkpoint, and FortiGate. Checkpoint is in the enterprise range, it is very high end. It's not a very cheap product compared because when it comes to pricing Checkpoint is very expensive. If you're comparing Sophos to FortiGate they are more or less similar. FortiGate can do a virtual firewall that Sophos cannot.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment is very fast. With an engineer, it can take a few hours. 

Sophos is quite flexible when it comes to pricing.

I would just say keep it simple, don't make it too complex. Keep it simple and then from there scale it up.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

To make it a higher score, Sophos should look at the virtual firewall feature because most of the current players like Juniper have the option for a virtual firewall. That way you can actually split up into multiple different firewalls or one physical firewall.

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.

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.

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 are a service provider and Sophos Cyberoam UTM is one of the security products that we have experience with, in that capacity. It is primarily used for layer three gateway protection.

This is a managed service, which means that the customer does not need to purchase hardware and employ a system integrator to install it. Rather, they just have to subscribe to it. The service includes reports that we provide to the clients.

The most valuable feature is the layer three gateway protection.

Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs.

The GUI is not very user-friendly and should be improved. One of our customers had trouble with the configuration and needed somebody to help manage it for them.

The vendor needs to generally invest more in the development of this product.

The product, itself, doesn't seem to have any bugs or glitches. However, one of our customers had a lot of trouble with it because it wasn't being managed.

I have not been in contact with technical support.

We recently had a customer that was using this product, although we later persuaded them to switch to the Fortinet product, FortiGuard UTM. The suitability of Cyberoam UTM depends on the required sizing.

In summary, I don't think that Sophos Cyberoam UTM is a friendly product to work with, and I would recommend the solution by Fortinet instead.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

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. 

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.