Sophos XG Reviews

The primary use case for Sophos XG is basic firewalling and configuration. We use it primarily for installation purposes.

Time-saving and cost-saving benefits are realized, with stability contributing to these advantages. It provides approximately 10% to 15% savings in time and costs.

The most valuable features of Sophos XG include having rules and policies as a firewall. It is easy to configure.

The areas needing improvement are support and configuration. The delays in technical support can be handled better. Sometimes, configuration gives some issues.

I have been using Sophos XG for almost one year.

No hardware or software solution is 100% stable. I would rate it at about 99% accuracy.

Sophos XG has excellent scalability features. It is already available on cloud as well as on-premises, and you can scale up to multiple firewalls with centralized management. No limitations have been faced regarding scalability.

Customer service and support can be improved as there are delays. I would rate the support at eight out of ten.

Positive

Sophos XG is easy to install, generally requiring one person and takes about two to three hours depending on the rules and policies.

One person is usually sufficient for installation unless multiple dynamics are involved.

The return on investment is judged to be around three point five out of five in terms of stability, time saving, and cost saving.

The solution is considered cheap in terms of pricing.

For small and midsize enterprises, Sophos XG is a good choice without any major issues.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Actually, we are using Tekton for creating CI/CD pipelines for building and deploying applications to different environments.

It helped a lot in terms of automation. We sometimes use Tekton for purposes like sending emails, running batch jobs, and similar tasks.

The valuable features include cloud-native integration, which makes it highly available and efficient in modern containerized environments. Another feature is the modular pipeline that allows reusing CI/CD manifests for different purposes. This modularity helps in reducing redundancy and maintaining a streamlined process.

One area of improvement is the lack of cross-cluster capability, meaning you need different sets of tasks and pipelines for each Kubernetes cluster. Tekton also has an unstable API with frequent changes, making it challenging to maintain consistency across versions. Additionally, there's a need for a better dashboard and built-in authentication mechanisms.

It's about one and a half years we have been working with Tekton.

Tekton is quite stable when used in a well-established Kubernetes cluster. The stability largely depends on the stability of the Kubernetes environment itself, which is designed for high availability.

Tekton's scalability is one of its most advanced features. Since it uses the underlying Kubernetes infrastructure, it can scale easily if the Kubernetes cluster is sufficiently large. I would rate it eight out of ten for scalability.

We primarily used community resources like Stack Overflow for addressing our issues and did not directly contact Tekton's customer service.

Positive

In my previous company, we used GitLab and Jenkins for creating CICD pipelines. Currently, Tekton is the primary tool we are using, with Jenkins as a backup solution if Tekton encounters any issues.

The initial setup was manageable but required extensive reading and understanding of documentation. If the Kubernetes cluster is already in place, the setup can be completed in less than ten minutes.

The deployment of Tekton was done in-house with a team of six to seven people handling deployment, creating CI/CD pipelines, and maintaining the solution.

Tekton is an open-source tool, meaning there are no setup costs associated with it. I would rate the cost at one, indicating it is free to use.

In my previous company, we used GitLab and Jenkins for similar purposes.

My advice is to avoid using Tekton if possible due to its complex setup and lack of user-friendly features like a comprehensive dashboard and built-in authentication mechanisms.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Mainly as a firewall, and in some cases, as a firewall with camera surveillance integration. But primarily, it is used for firewall functionality.

I find the firewall functionality and unified threat management to be the most useful features.

The VPN has been a persistent problem for us. It's not straightforward to configure. We often encounter issues with setting up the VPN. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and we haven't been able to determine the cause.

So the VPN configuration could be less cryptic. It should be easier and more straightforward to configure. A simplified installation process and clearer instructions would be helpful. The current VPN configuration is a bit convoluted.

In additional features, it would be beneficial if Sophos XG could have an enhanced feature for aggregating bandwidth. Currently, it supports load balancing to some extent, but it would be even better if it could aggregate the bandwidth. For example, if I have multiple links, say two or three, it would be great if the solution could aggregate the bandwidth from those links. 

Ever since Sophos acquired Cyberoam. I used to use Cyberoam, and then Sophos took over Cyberoam. So I would say it's been about five to seven years since that transition happened. 

I have various versions because I'm a network service provider. I offer the high-end enterprise edition as well as the mid-range and basic versions. There are several different models available.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It is very stable. 

When deploying on-premises, if you need to scale, you have to purchase additional hardware. So, on-premises scalability would be around six out of ten. You have to size the solution for future needs.

The cloud version is much more scalable. However, when it comes to on-premises deployments, scaling can be challenging. If you need to upgrade to a higher level, you have to acquire another hardware box. So, it's not as straightforward as cloud scalability, but it's still possible, though not as easy. 

There are about 200 users. They are small and medium businesses. 

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. It required some experience in designing networks. It's not a simple "click-click-click" process; it requires the expertise of a network professional. So, if you're not experienced, it can be challenging.

It can be difficult for inexperienced users, but with the right knowledge and experience, it is manageable.

The deployment process involved acquiring the device, planning the network design, configuring it according to the desired network setup, and then connecting the necessary cables. It's a relatively straightforward process.

It only took an hour to deploy the solution.

It is fairly priced. I would rate it an eight out of ten. Mostly, I only purchase the standard license because I don't usually require the other features. It would cost approximately $2,000 on an annual basis.

Overall, my experience has been positive. I haven't encountered any major issues with it. It's easy to use and not cryptic. It's also quite stable, and I rarely experience any hangs or similar problems.

I would rate this product an eight out of ten because there is still room for improvement in VPN. 

We are a solution provider and this is one of the security solutions that we implement for our clients. The primary use for Sophos XG is to secure the internet for an organization. It does a bit of antivirus scanning, application filtering, web filtering, and normal firewalling. Security, obviously.

Some of our clients also have Sophos UAP and access points are also included in Sophos, which is the same with FortiGate.

Sophos XG is easy to manage. You've got the cloud logging and you can manage all of your Sophos firewalls from one cloud, the Sophos Central Portal.

The most valuable feature is endpoint security. If you want to install antivirus and firewalling on endpoints, then Sophos is the best option.

What I don't like about Sophos is that applying policies can sometimes take longer, and there can even be a bit of a network interruption. With FortiGate, it's just one click and then you go, but with Sophos, sometimes the wheel keeps spinning for several seconds.

The SD-WAN capability is not as good as it is in FortiGate, and is something that should be improved.

I have been working with Sophos XG for approximately two and a half years.

Stability-wise, it's almost as good as FortiGate.

I've been selling FortiGate for 10 years and Sophos for two and a half years. I think that Sophos is just about on par with FortiGate. We just had a small thing with a client, but I don't know if that's really going to be reason enough. In terms of stability, I think they are quite good. The issue we had was the locks, and it was causing slowness or interruptions, but that was really not an issue. It's a small thing.

Sophos XG is very scalable. You can go from small to large-sized use cases.

I think that the technical support is very good, and similar to FortiGate,

I actually dealt directly with a Sophos engineer and I must admit, they've been very fortunate that the guy can help even on the weekends and so forth. I'm very impressed with that.

I primarily work with FortiGate, but I am currently dabbling in OPNSense to see if I can learn it. I've also installed Cisco in the past, as well as Sophos.

Although about 80% of our clients ask for FortiGate, some of our clients ask for Sophos instead. For example, there are some banks and commercial institutions that ask for Sophos.

Sophos is better than FortiGate with respect to endpoint protection.

The initial setup is as easy as it is with FortiGate. These products are definitely easier to install than a solution like OPNsense because it is just a hardware appliance.

The price of this solution is mid-range. Obviously, it will never beat OPNsense because that product is available free of charge. Sophos XG is not expensive for a firewall, especially when you compare it with Check Point. Check Point is a really expensive product.

Sophos XG is a bit more expensive than companies like BitDefender and Kaspersky, but their endpoint software is very good.

The suitability of this product depends on the use case. If somebody wants to have full endpoint protection then Sophos is the best choice. If they just want a normal UTM without endpoint software, then FortiGate is slightly better, but only slightly because of the SD-WAN capabilities. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I mainly use Sophos XG for network firewall protection and VPN access. It helps secure our internet connection and allows us to manage our network traffic efficiently. Additionally, we use it for monitoring our local network.

Sophos XG has significantly improved our remote workforce security. It effectively safeguards our information systems and data, while also enabling us to restrict access to unauthorized websites. This has been particularly valuable for ensuring productivity and security across all our branches nationwide.

The most valuable features of Sophos XG for our use cases are its firewall capabilities, its ability to connect to wide area and local networks, and its VPN functionality. It effectively protects our information systems while simplifying VPN setup across branches, eliminating the need for additional VPN services from our internet service provider.

One area where Sophos XG could improve is in its patch management system. I encountered an issue where installing a new patch resulted in being locked out of the firewall, which was quite inconvenient. This suggests a vulnerability that needs addressing to ensure administrators can update patches without losing access. Such incidents shouldn't require a complete reconfiguration, so there is definitely room for improvement in this aspect.

One piece of advice I would offer is for Sophos XG to consistently incorporate the latest technologies to stay competitive with other vendors. Ensuring that new features are regularly updated and integrated into future products will enhance the platform's effectiveness and appeal to users.

I have been working with Sophos XG for seven years.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as an eight out of ten. It is highly scalable and capable of covering a growing number of end users. Whether managing a small or large user base, its scalability makes it adaptable to varying network sizes and user demands. In my organization, we have approximately two thousand users across various branches using Sophos XG daily.

I would rate the initial setup of Sophos XG as a solid ten out of ten in terms of ease. With a clear understanding of the process and step-by-step guidance, setting it up was straightforward and hassle-free.

It took me around 30 minutes to deploy Sophos XG. The deployment process involved configuring the LAN, WAN, and VPN settings at each branch. Once connected to the switch and router, it was ready to use, making it a straightforward and quick setup process. 

Maintaining Sophos XG typically requires only one or two people, depending on the size and complexity of the network deployment.

The most effective feature of Sophos XG for threat prevention is its regular patch management system. By consistently updating software and firmware with new patches, it helps prevent attacks by addressing vulnerabilities and staying ahead of emerging threats.

The web filtering capability of Sophos XG has benefited our organization by effectively blocking users from accessing specific websites during office hours and even restricting access to certain sites altogether. This feature has been instrumental in enforcing our web usage policies and ensuring a secure browsing environment.

The performance of Sophos XG's firewall has met our expectations perfectly.

We have integrated Sophos XG with other security equipment such as routers and switches. While we primarily use it as a standalone product, in some branches, we have connected it with other security solutions for enhanced protection.

I would recommend implementing Sophos XG for its effectiveness as a firewall. Before installing it, consider factors like your current network equipment, intended use, user compliance with security controls, and whether your technical staff may need training if they're unfamiliar with Sophos firewall.

Overall, I would rate Sophos XG as a ten out of ten.

I use Sophos XG for network security and VPN policies. It is crucial for safeguarding data, enforcing user access controls, and ensuring secure communication. The firewall features, like application control and intrusion prevention, provide a strong defense against cyber threats. With centralized management, setting up and monitoring policies becomes easy, and the VPN capabilities ensure secure remote access for our team.

What I like about Sophos XG is its versatility in tailoring security features to our specific needs. In our environment where certain services are only needed part-time, the flexibility to deploy services selectively is valuable. The comprehensive protection, from firewall to market inspection and routing, ensures a robust defense. I particularly like the visibility it provides into network traffic, allowing us to identify and address issues efficiently.

While Sophos XG has been reliable for remote troubleshooting sessions, it would be beneficial if the platform provided more flexible support for a variety of devices. The user interface is intuitive for those familiar with it, but improving accessibility and user guidance could be beneficial for newcomers. Additionally, although the features are comprehensive, fair pricing and more flexibility with device compatibility could make it even more appealing in the market.

I have been working with Sophos XG for two years.

It is quite stable.

I would give it a ten out of ten for scalability. We have approximately 100 users.

Tech support for Sophos XG is great. They are professional, respond quickly, and help resolve issues effectively.

Previously, I have used Fortinet and SonicWall.

The initial setup of Sophos XG is not complex, especially with familiarity and experience. As you work with it over time, it becomes more straightforward, and mastery comes with continuous use. Deployment depends on specific organizational needs, but in general, it involves configuring the connection between the internet and the local network, setting up VLANs, and defining firewall rules. For me, as a consultant, the process varies based on different client scenarios. Sophos XG simplifies the deployment process, and once configured, it efficiently manages network access for different user categories.

I have done both in-house deployments and collaborated with integrators based on the client's preference. As a consultant, I assess the needs, design the setup, and can either guide the in-house team through the deployment or handle it myself. The process involves configuring the live site for optimal security, and in some cases, I work remotely on existing setups. Sophos XG's flexibility makes it feasible for both in-house and external experts to manage the deployment effectively.

The payment structure can depend on the reseller or partner. Typically, it involves getting the device first, and then the licensing is managed, often in US dollars, through the partner or reseller. The process ensures proper handling and support through authorized channels.

I would recommend Sophos XG for anyone looking to build robust IT systems. It is ideal if you have a clear vision of your IT infrastructure and want a solution that can seamlessly integrate and enhance security. The flexibility to tailor it to specific needs makes Sophos XG a valuable choice for building a reliable and secure network. Overall, I would rate it as a ten out of ten.

The solution is mostly used for setting up a firewall and policies. 

The solution is very easy to understand. 

It's simple to set up the firewall and policies. Setting rules is very easy on Sophos as compared to other solutions. 

The product offers many great features. 

Technical support is very good. 

The initial setup is easy.

We have found the solution to be very stable.

A company can easily scale the product if they need to. 

When upgrading the firewalls, the process could be easier. 

While we do have network control, we don't have network monitoring. If I have 200 nodes and I want to see what's happening, I don't have visibility, especially if people are working remotely. 

If we could control roaming users through the firewalls and make it so that it's more of a  complete security solution, which we prefer, that would be ideal. If we have to install some clients on these machines, that's fine. The only concern is the DLP. We want to protect our data from being stolen. We'd also like to monitor activities from the perspective of productivity. We want to be able to track and calculate what users are doing on their machines.

I've been using the solution for more than ten years. 

Earlier, Sophos was known as Cyberoam, Before that, I use Cyberoam and now this has turned into Sophos.

The stability is very good. It does not crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. the solution is reliable. 

The level of scalability depends on the box. We do have the option to scale if we need to.

I have found the technical support to be very helpful and responsive. I am pleased with the level of support I can get. They always provide proper solutions to all issues, whatever we face.

It is not difficult to set up the solution. One ISP, internet service provider, is required, and that is sufficient. If you do have a landline, some switches are available, and we can add to that a firewall. That is secondary. However, the initial requirement is nothing. It is just a plug-and-play setup that is very straightforward.

We had a vendor assist us with the installation. 

There's no additional cost for installation. The provider from which we purchased, the vendor, himself arranged all installation and configuration. They helped us. However, even through customer care, a company can ask for assistance. 

I'm not providing any services. I'm using the product as a customer only. The company, one day, would like to become a partner, however. 

I would recommend the solution to other companies. 

I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten, specifically if I compare it to other options on the market. It's pretty good. 

It has been a while since I have worked with the product in our company, and so I can't remember its most effective features.

The support service offered by Sophos is an area of concern where certain improvements are required. My company did not get enough support when, in our enterprise, we faced some issues with the product and needed support. For support, one has to go with the online community, and even then, it cannot be guaranteed that one will get the right support.

The support team's response time should be minimized. The support should be more available. I think that one has to wait for four or five days to get support. Business cannot stop just because of issues with support. The tool's renewal service was really good and straightforward.

Some of the working features of the product, like sandboxing functionalities, are complex for me to handle, especially since one has to buy them separately. You have to buy sandboxing features separately, but I believe that it needs to be given to a user along with the product. In my company, we couldn't find the detection features of the product. Though I did a remote code execution, and it stopped abruptly, it never showed where it actually stopped. In the area of reporting, there needs to be a lot of improvement in the tool.

Partner engagement is an area in which I feel there should be some improvements. Getting support or being able to deal with certain stuff when it comes to Sophos because of the OEM should be made possible. When an OEM is with you, you'll feel more comfortable doing business. My company started doing Fortinet a few days ago, but before that, we had Sophos. My company is moving away from Sophos because it is no longer needed. When it comes to the price or during some disconnection, my company doesn't get any support from Sophos.

I have been using Sophos XG since 2021.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten.

Neutral

Our company uses Microsoft Defender, Kaspersky, and Trend Micro.

As my company has partnerships with Microsoft and Sophos, the best part we get is in the areas of support services and distributors as we are involved in the reselling business. My company also has to operate with some local resellers, so we get support from them at a good price from them, and even during deployment, we get some support from them. I worked with Microsoft in 2019 and stopped working with it in 2020 during COVID-19. I got familiar with many tools during COVID-19, so I can get the business prices of the solutions. If I keep Microsoft Defender aside, then my company does business with Trend Micro as well. Trend Micro provides whatever help my company needs, and the tool's team greatly engages with us and supports us. With Sophos, my company doesn't get any support. I think Sophos does not do direct business anymore. Sophos doesn't have any OEM office. If there is no OEM office for a product, the company can face a lot of trouble.

I did business with Sophos in 2021. I think that last year, we got a Sophos Firewall deployed in our organization. The product's initial setup phase was straightforward.

The solution can be deployed in two days.

Nowadays, my company recommends Palo Alto and Fortinet. With Fortinet, my company is comfortable because it looks after our needs, and it is really helpful.

The user interface of the product is good, especially since its customers are satisfied.

Sophos XG supports our customers' remote workflows well. As a customer-centric tool, they use it as part of their company.

The product can be recommended to SMBs. My company's people requested Sophos products for 450 people or endpoints, but we didn't get any response from Sophos. My company emailed an agent from Sophos, but we didn't get any response for 44 servers and 400 endpoints we wanted. I work at a hospital, so we didn't get any price quotation associated with the product.

The features of the product are good. It is not like Sophos told me something and its products were working in a different manner.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten.