Sophos UTM Reviews

We primarily use the solution for the firewall and VPN.

The web filtering is great.

The initial setup has been fine. 

You can increase usage if you need to.

The VPN could be better. We need a better VPN client for the customers.

We'd like better logging. 

I've used the solution for six years.

We have about 3,000 users on the product right now. We do have plans to increase usage in the future.

Technical support has been fine. We are satisfied with the level of service we get. 

Neutral

We also use Fortinet and pfSense.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. It's not overly difficult or complex to set up. 

The licensing is paid on a yearly basis. You just need to pay the standard licensing fee. There are no extra costs. 

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten. It's been okay.

We are a partner of the product.

Mostly when we see that the client has no security product, we offer both of the products: firewall and endpoint security. We offer endpoint security solutions: EDR and XDR.

Most of the time, we offer Sophos UTM and firewall products, but when we see that the customer has a firewall already deployed, we pitch endpoint security. If they're already using a different product, we cross-sell a product. For example, if someone has an environment with just endpoint security and doesn't have XDR or EDR, we'll suggest upgrading to XDR or we'll upsell XDR.

The overall visibility of the console is what I find most valuable, plus it's very user-friendly. It can be integrated with other solutions such as SOAR, SIEM, etc., even when you have an existing firewall. I really like that the console can be integrated. You'll see everything on the same window, and the single window feature of the machine is so good. These are the features I really like.

I have no suggestions for improvement for Sophos UTM. It's been a decade and it has been a very good product throughout the Pakistan market.

Pricing could be improved. After-sales service is much better. Once you have a sales team and a technical team for any product, it definitely becomes very easy to pitch or get the revenues out of that product. Flexibility in pricing matters a lot.

This is the fourth year we've been implementing this solution.

Sophos UTM is stable which is why I like it.

I find Sophos UTM scalable and it is one of the reasons I like it.

For Sophos support: the distributor is responsible for providing maintenance, support, and after-sales service. Most of the time, we try to have an agreement between the customer and affiliates which is binding for two or three years.

The support team here is from the distributor. The first layer of support is really fine when compared to the support provided by other products, e.g. McAfee or Kaspersky. This means it doesn't go to the principal for resolution because the distributor or the partner experts try to fix it on their own before logging in to further complaints. We are good with this kind of solution for our customers, and we prefer those distributors who have their support team.

This is why I really like Softech, although everyone does this, Sophos relies on the Softech technical team. They fix the issues most of the time, so it's very rare for us to go to the principal solution. This is the first line of support we have here in Pakistan.

The principal response time is so quick. It took them only two or three hours maximum. I had the experience of addressing an issue to the principal and they were able to answer me in two or three hours maximum. They have a good TA team.

Although Sophos UTM is a good product, other products have more flexibility with their pricing. It is a very fine product, but when someone wants more relaxed pricing or more leverage in pricing, Sophos is more rigid.

For example, Kaspersky is successful in Fintechs because of its services, plus they offer flexible pricing to their end users. It's a comparative advantage here in Pakistan because Pakistan is a very price-conscious market. This is the reason why every time we pitch, we have to pitch more than one product here in Pakistan. They spend their money on SIEM and other kinds of security firewall, but for endpoint solutions, they say any low-budget product could easily be implemented. Most of the customers here in Pakistan like it this way.

We also implemented Kaspersky and McAfee.

We are a partner for all these products. We market these products to the end customers or the end users. We are both selling and implementing these products. We're partners with Sophos. There's a distributor in Pakistan called Softech Microsystems, and we have a silver-level partnership with them.

We've been working with Sophos since 2019.

In the financial market, however, Kaspersky is being used more than Sophos because of its credibility, integration, and extra features offered by Kaspersky. We always try to recommend Sophos as it's what we want, but sometimes, because we also carry a Kaspersky partnership, when a customer demands for Kaspersky, we have to let the customer test it and we have to give them a quote for Kaspersky. We also carry another product, e.g. McAfee, aside from Kaspersky and Sophos. Sophos UTM is a product I want to go further. I try to pitch Sophos UTM rather than Kaspersky or McAfee.

I'm giving this solution a nine out of ten.

Whenever we go for the public tenders, because there's no price flexibility, most of the time I find other products win. Although we have completed our POCs and all that, convincing customers to go with our product, but when it goes to the tenders: in the tenders they mention specification rather than mentioning a particular product, so we'll have to qualify. We qualify technically, but when it comes to the commercial opening or the financial opening, we fail.

We mainly use it for web filtration — we have a number of small websites. It's also a VPN — that's filtering, firewalling, and IPS.

Within our organization, there are roughly 250 people using Sophos UTM. Also, we have around 15 XG users.

We plan on using XG for the next few years, but we are going to stop using UTM on our main site.

I think the behavior with the zones was a little bit tricky to understand at the beginning of this project. It can be hard to manage at first, but overall, we don't have many problems with this solution.

I have been using this solution for one and a half years.

It's stable, but the reaction time of the GUI is terrible; however, in my opinion, UTM is more stable than XG.

Sometimes, It can be quite a time-consuming process to book a session with Sophos' support.

The initial setup was not straightforward because we had experience with UTM, but not with XG. It's a completely different system. 

We had it up and running within one week.

We installed it on our own.

I would recommend UTM over XG because it's easier to manage.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give XG a rating of 6. Conversely, I would give UTM a rating of nine.

We use it for antivirus.

It meets our compliance needs in an elastic computer environment.

It meets our compliance needs for antivirus.

The printed provisioning is the primary thing that needs improvement.

It is a little too CPU resource intensive, so we would like to see improvements there.

We are running about a couple hundred EC2 instances. Overall, the AWS Marketplace product should be a better fit, but it is a little pricier.

When we need technical support, we just engage the vendor, then figure out what our requirements are from there.

The integration and configuration of this product on our AWS environment is a little clunky right now.

The product is a standalone in terms of integration.

Going forward, we need to look at the provisioning pieces and the resource utilization.

The AWS version is easier to provision than the on-premise version.

• Firewalls
• Developer access
• VPN traffic
• Rerouting and routing.

I am using it to route traffic for developer access or regular traffic for my instances. I have a web application, and I control access to and from it in one of my environments.

All my needs are met at the moment.

Our policy is launch and forget. It works well without any maintenance. So far, it has worked pretty well regardless of the traffic.

The product could be simplified and made more self-explanatory.

I am stressing it quite a bit, and the stability is great. I haven't performed any maintenance on the instances in quite a while now. It works. I am happy because everything works well.

My throughput is moderate versus high throughput applications.

I am always holding a predefined number of instances, so I haven't had any issues.

I have not used the technical support.

The configuration was pretty complex on my side compared to OpenVPN. However, this might imply that Sophos has more use cases and capabilities. It depends.

I am also using OpenVPN. 

Partially, for historic reasons, things were built prior to me being able to evaluate stuff. At the moment, we are using both solutions. In terms of pricing, when I need to spin up anything small with smaller requirements, I am using the free OpenVPN instead of Sophos UTM.

Do your homework. Compare products. Use what you need depending on your needs.

We are only using the AWS version of the product.

Reverse proxy, SSL VPN, web & email protection

For me, those features were most valuable from a security point of view;

• Reverse proxy is very important for shielding application frameworks.

• For VPN, we all knew that PPTP was broken and is not secure anymore. For Ipsec, you need to have opened ports, and if you are in a hotel who only has ports 80 and 443 opened, you can’t do anything.

SSLVPN is one of the solutions. Yes, you can use DirectAccess, but there are some limitations, too.

For DirectAccess, you need to have all those computers joined in one domain.

• Web & email protection is a nice feature because you have all of those controls in one dashboard. This is of course for small and maybe some mid-size companies. For larger and enterprise, it’s another story.

Less and faster administration, full control of traffic, and a lot of futures included in the base price.

The goal for small companies is to have one administration dashboard -- from where you can manage antivirus for computers, firewalls, IDS, IPS, mobile phones, tablets, etc.

Sophos UTM is on the right path to getting there.

Sophos UTM 135 = two years.
Sophos UTM 115 = one year.

No problems with stability.

No problems with scalability.

The technical support is really good and the representatives are very responsive.

Cisco (didn’t achieve expectations), Microsoft TMG (end of life).

The setup is straightforward, but I suggest hiring an expert for integration. This is your first line of defense, and there is no room for mistakes.

Sophos UTM’s are not the cheapest but they are not the most expensive. Create a checklist of what you need, and go through it with a sales representative. They will advise the right license for your company and I’m sure you can get some discount.

Cisco, CheckPoint UTM-1

Create a checklist with your requirements, test the solution, and if it passes everything, implement it.

Valuable Features include Sophos Remote Access VPN, Country Based Firewall, Web Application Firewall, Ease of access (via browser) and Reporting.

Sophos UTM helps us to control incoming and outgoing network traffic. It also helps employees connect to the AWS VPC environment from remote locations. Web application firewall protects applications from different hacking attempts like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, Cookie signing, URL hardening etc. On top of that, it also helps the organization adhere to compliance rules and provides an audit trail of the environment.

Sophos UTM is not a highly available and scalable product. Till now, it is a single point of failure.

2.5 years.

No issues encountered. We had a very smooth deployment.

No issues with stability.

Yes. Sophos UTM on AWS is not an scalable product. Sophos is actively working on scalability part from using a UTM manager which can control configuration deployment on multiple UTM's

Customer service level is top notch.

Very Good. All our queries were properly answered on time.

Yes. Earlier, we had used Checkpoint. But the deployment procedure and user interface for Checkpoint was very complicated. The amount of time to invest in checkpoint is nearly 2x than Sophos. Checkpoint requires tool to be installed on your system while Sophos is a browser based tool.

It was a very straightforward setup. As it is a browser based tool, it helps administrator to access it from different location and system. We don't have to download desktop clients on our local system. Also, we can access this product from different operating systems (linux, windows and Mac).

We deployed it in-house.

ROI for the product is very high. The cost of the product is based on the number of users and the licensing is not too expensive.

On AWS, instances/servers are charged on hourly basis. The yearly licensing cost for 10 years is nearly around $200-300.

While we were looking for deployment of UTM product on AWS in year 2011, there were only 2 stable products available in market i.e., Sophos and Checkpoint. We choose to go ahead with Sophos.

Easy to use, Easy to access, good for compliance. It is a very good product as compared to others available on AWS.

We use this solution ourselves and we also deploy to our clients. It is a capable, general-purpose firewall with VPN tunneling built in, and a lot of web features if you're hosting a website. We are resellers of Sophos and I'm a partner in our company. 

We haven't changed our procedures as a result of using this product but maybe the flip side is the case. We haven't had to change our procedure because we have this great tool that keeps the bad guys away.

I would say the email for sure and the basic firewall functions are great features. It also has advanced firewall scanning. If you receive a file, you can have it scanned through Sophos. It's a really complete product.

Sophos has a very small crew of people who continue to work on enhancing the UTM. At some point, they had actually stopped enhancing it and the word on the street was that they weren't going to enhance it any more because everybody was going to go over to XG, but they found that 50% of their users were still on the UTM and that was five years after they'd come out with the XG line. They decided they were going to rebuild some core parts of XG, and that would take a while. It's been six years and they're still not there. The updates come out agonizingly slowly. They just trickle out and when there's a problem with an update it takes a while to sort out. It's still a viable product but the more they improve XG, the less you have a need to stick with SG.

I've been using this solution for 15 years. 

There are some legacy things that were probably fine back in the day when it was invented in Germany, things like the IPS, the Intrusion Protection engine. It's terrific and it works really well, but it can be a little bit slow. Because of the way that some pieces are built, for example the core for the IPS runs on only core, even if you have a multi-core CPU. 15 years ago that wasn't a big deal because your weak link was going to be your computer. But nowadays, you could have a fast enough computer if they could just let it work with multi-cores. They clearly aren't interested in rewriting large portions of the code because they're going to the XG so all they do is fix it or maybe add a feature that's in the marketplace. Over time, they've been adding more ways to do a VPN tunnel but some things they need haven't been added because it would require a big rewrite and they don't want to go there.

The scalability has worked great for us. Everyone in our company uses it even though some may not know that they're using it. One of our larger clients, with a super computing center and some of the fastest computers in the world, use Sophos, so I would say that it does the job.  

Technical support have been very good. They are very knowledgeable but it can take too long to make contact. They're great once you do get hold of them. They've solved every problem we've had. 

We've tried numerous other solutions. Cisco, and some of the other major ones that were out there, but once we started using this, it was so much better in so many ways, we just dumped all the others.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. They have a template which takes you through and asks what you want protected. There's still a lot to do after that because there are variations which require more work. For example, if I have clients who need to block certain email addresses, I have to go through and set those up. If I need to allow conversations which require specific ports open in order to get to a particular business or credit card processing, that has to be set up. There is a lot of HIPAA detail in it and it also has credit card compliance things which require a manual set up. The setup requires a knowledge base. 

The solution is 100% free. You can just download the software for up to 50 IP addresses. It is a hundred percent free. Throw it on your own machine. Right, it's a native Linux product, a hardened Linux product and it's free for that sort of user.

The solution has email firewall built in with all sorts of functionality, it is an absolutely excellent firewall, the logging is really good, you get great information about what's going on. It does things like GeoIP tracking and you can make decisions based on where people are coming from. It's just really a complete firewall. I would say if you're just starting right now, get the XG. Not that the UPM isn't outstanding, but it's disappearing. You might as well learn the XG. The product still works really well, although it's getting a bit long in the tooth. The sooner that they come out with the XG that can do everything that the UTM does, the faster the rest of the world will make the jump.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.