The IPS and endpoint protection function.
A standard Firewall of an access router, monitoring up to OSI level 4, is unacceptable anymore these days. The endpoint protection solution is integrated, thus running along with the notification function.
The IPS and endpoint protection function.
A standard Firewall of an access router, monitoring up to OSI level 4, is unacceptable anymore these days. The endpoint protection solution is integrated, thus running along with the notification function.
All the necessary functions being incorporated into one solution with notifications configured, I know I am secure against threats from the internet. (Up to the limits of the solution in the constantly evolving and dangerous Internet).
I've used this solution for three years.
Some with the IPS function (snort).
In my case, when restarting the system (because of an update), I doubt that snort starts correctly and do a manual restart of the IPS function (see my answer for 'Room for Improvement').
As a free home user, I have not used the support services up until now.
Once, I did upload an Office document that appeared to give a false positive, but never got a notification. I understand this because of the priorities that have to be given, but I would have liked to receive a (even small) reaction.
I did take a look at other open source solutions, but found the Sophos UTM, being the best professional free for Home UTM solutions, full blown, and updated daily, to be the best solution.
The setup wizard provided me with just enough insight into the basics of the solution -- to be able to start using the solution fully after some self-study and exploration of the various knowledge bases and forums.
I looked at some open source variants but being able to use the best professional (free for the home version) product with regular updates -- convinced me to use the Sophos UTM solution at Home.
The instability and best effort service of a community of the open source solution did not give the right trust to depend on in the battle against the negative sides of the worldwide internet
Start simple and step-by-step, and start using the product fully.
Sophos UTM gives good visibility and prevention against ransomware attacks because they focus on unknown threats, so it's successful in protecting customers.
Sophos UTM's best feature is SIM in the cloud, which combines the gateway solution and endpoint solution to send telemetry data to the cloud and provides full contact visibility regarding security.
Sophos UTM's firewall is a bit weak, and some of its features lack depth compared to other products like F5.
I've been using Sophos UTM for about eight years.
Sophos UTM is quite stable.
Sophos UTM is quite simple to scale.
Sophos' technical support is good.
The initial setup takes around seven to nine days.
I would rate our ROI from Sophos UTM as three to four out of five.
Sophos UTM's pricing is on the cheaper side.
I would advise starting with the basic firewall before adding other features. I would give Sophos UTM a rating of seven out of ten.
We use Sophos UTM to protect our infrastructure.
There are things missing when it comes to policies.
The web filtering capability should be improved.
Anti-phishing functionality should be improved.
We have been using Sophos Unified Threat Management (UTM) for two years.
This is a very stable product.
Scaling this solution works fine.
The initial setup is complex.
Our licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.
Overall, this product is very good and I recommend it for other users.
I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.
We replace customers' old and expensive devices such as firewalls, anti-spam, etc. with Sophos, as it has all these features. You don't need four boxes if you can have all these features in one box.
The most valuable features are
There is still room for improvement in wireless protection. I don't mean their WiFi device is bad, but there are still things to improve on, such as WiFi roaming.
No issues with stability.
No, everything works perfectly.
They have consultants who can help you quickly.
You can use the wizard which will guide you through all the initial settings.
Sometimes more is less, meaning if you want more than three features, take the FullGuard licence.
We do not use this on AWS.
Before implementing the SG appliance, completely prepare the rules for your network; know what and where you want to implement.
I am using it for security, antivirus, and malware detection.
It has helped by identifying threats within the company. If there are computers or servers that are compromised, then we are able to identify them right away in the system.
It can identify threats quickly, then find the affected devices and quarantine them.
It ease of use: The GUI is easy to maneuver through; it is not complicated.
The support needs improvement.
It has been stable. We haven't had issues. It does what it is supposed to do.
Since it is cloud-based, scalability works great. We have around 300 users in our environment.
The technical support only communicates via email. I would prefer to communicate directly with someone.
We also considered Symantec and McAfee. We did not chose them because we had experience with both of them and were not happy with their platforms.
We chose Sophos for its ease of use and it detects malware and viruses that other companies can't detect.
The product works. It helps you identify threats within the environment.
We were able to integrate it with different devices and the installation is straightforward.
We are using the cloud-based version, but it is through Sophos directly. We are not using AWS. A lot of this stuff is also on-premise.
I mainly use Sophos UTM to provide network security.
Sophos UTM's best feature is synchronized security.
Sophos UTM's internet security could be better.
I've been using Sophos UTM for three years.
I would rate Sophos UTM's stability eight out of ten.
Sophos UTM is easy to scale.
Sophos's technical support is very good and easy to connect to.
The initial setup was simple.
Sophos UTM is moderately priced, but it could be improved.
I evaluated Fortinet, but Sophos UTM is easier to manage and more efficiently priced.
I would rate Sophos UTM eight out of ten.
Our primary use cases include:
We have securely deploy systems accesible only behind encrypted ssl vpn and all user can access without the risk of data exposure.
The most valuable feature is the price. I've been requesting prices all over these years between different solutions like Fortinet, Palo Alto, and Check Point and Sophos has been the cheapest and the best of all of them that I have tried. I have been working with Fortinet, it's a fact that the sophos price is surprisingly better.
I have also worked with Check Point and it's not far enough from what Sophos can do. In terms of quality and functionality, Sophos is very useful and better than the competition.
Sophos should improve its ability to check something like bandwidth consumption for users or something more real-time.
real time trafic graph most show specific info from user, ip and bandwith, in my personal opinion i have seen better traffic graphs in open source firewalls.
I have been using Sophos UTM for six years.
It's very stable. In all the time I have been using it, I haven't seen it fail or gets stuck.
Scalability is not a complex issue and is something you can do within 20 minutes. I've been managing three UTMs, one with 50 users, another one with around 150, and the biggest one has 3,000 users.
i used PFSense, the capabilities of UTM sophos y very much higher and powerfull.
The initial setup was straightforward. It depends on the rules, but a basic setup can take up to seven to 15 minutes max.
Based on cost compare with other vendor who bill per license and OTP users, the ROI have been set as far as 6 moths.
SOphos is the best alternative in features, specifications and lower price.
yes i did, Fortinet, Checkpoint, Palo Alto, Meraki.
It's a good solution, I would say to go for it.
I would rate Sophos UTM a nine out of ten.
My primary use case is as a VPN, a firewall and a web filter.
We have a better level of protection and we have the ability for our devices to be more of a self-sustained type of resource.
The most valuable features are:
The memory and processing were problematic. The interface could be better.
I have no problem with the cost or licensing of this solution. This is a primary reason whay I wanted this solution. It does the same thing cheaper than other name brands.