Sophos XGS Reviews

we are using Sophos XGS for full control over our network.

Sophos XGS has improved our organization.

The most valuable feature of Sophos XGS is its ease of use.

The price of Sophos XGS could improve, it is high.

I have been using Sophos XGS for approximately two years.

Sophos XGS is stable.

The scalability of Sophos XGS is good.

We have approximately 10 technicians that know how to use the solution.

The support from Sophos XGS was responsive. They solved the issues we had.

Positive

We have not used another solution prior to Sophos XGS.

The initial setup of Sophos XGS was easy. The time it took for us to implement the solution was approximately one month.

We use a third party with our in-house team to do the implementation. We have 10 workers that maintain the solution.

I rate the return on investment for Sophos XGS a three out of five.

There is an annual licensing fee to use Sophos XGS. It is an expensive solution.

I rate the price of Sophos XGS a four out of five.

We did not evaluate another solution before choosing Sophos XGS.

I rate Sophos XGS seven out of ten.

We give both endpoint and firewall together.

We have a set of customers who understand Sophos very well. Once they achieve all the security functions and parameters they want, they are more secure. Many customers who previously used different endpoint and firewall solutions now benefit from synchronized functionality with the complete Sophos suite. So, they become more secure, which is more important.

The security heartbeat feature and MDR are the best for customer security.

The functionality of SD-WAN compared to other boxes is lacking. Certain aspects need improvement, particularly enhancing capabilities like SD-WAN. We should also focus on enhancing XDR and NDR functionality in the firewall boxes and provide more threat protection alerts to users.

I've been working with Sophos for more than 15 years.

The technical team never disappoints us in providing solutions. They give us timely and nice follow-up.

Positive

Many of them were using a different endpoint security and a different firewall. But now, with Sophos, they have better security.

The pricing is competitive, and it's a win-win situation for both partners and customers.

In the financial market and banks, other security appliances are more popular than Sophos.

We highly recommend Sophos XGS.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Sophos XGS mostly for website blocking, application blocking, and site-to-site VPN.

Compared to other products, Sophos XGS is a user-friendly solution.

It would be useful if Sophos XGS included DDNS-based features.

I have been using Sophos XGS for four years.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

Sophos XGS is a scalable solution. We have more than 50 users in our organization.

Sophos XGS provides good technical support. The support team has good knowledge of troubleshooting and fixing our issues.

The solution’s initial setup is complex.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution’s deployment takes half an hour to one hour.

Sophos XGS is a cost-effective solution.

I would recommend Sophos XGS to other users because it is more cost-effective than other products.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution as an antivirus gateway and internet gateway.

All the features are effective in enhancing our network security. I am satisfied with the product. The threat intelligence capabilities of the tool are good. It has contributed to reducing our overall security costs by approximately 90%.

I do not get notifications regarding ISP downtime. It would be better if I could get notifications related to the critical errors occurring in Sophos. The product is difficult to use. The administrators must be notified of the errors occurring in the firewall through emails or messages. It will help organizations take proactive measures instead of taking action after the incident happens.

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

The customer support is weak. The support team is not responsive. The support people do not follow up or call us back.

Negative

The implementation is not difficult. The service providers help install and implement the firewall in our network.

I will recommend the product to others. However, I would not recommend it to organizations that do not have technical people who deal with networks. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

The solution provides firewall protection.

The solution is easy to use and configure, once you know how to apply the policies.

The customer service response time can be improved.

I am currently using the solution.

The stability is good. I have not had any problems with it.

The scalability of the solution is good.

The customer service response time is slow and could use improvement.

The setup is straightforward if you know how to do iOS.

The cost is around $50 per endpoint, and there is a one-time purchase fee for the firewalls of $2,500, plus services. It is roughly around $4,000.

I am currently evaluating CrowdStrike. I like it better.

I give this solution seven out of ten.

If you are looking for a low-cost solution, cheaper than Cisco I recommend this solution. You should also look at Fortinet.

Sophos XGS is a unified threat management solution that combines features such as routing, access management, firewall, threat management, and URL filtering for sandboxing. It serves as a security appliance with multiple capabilities.

The valuable features of Sophos XGS include network protection, web protection, application control, intrusion detection, and iCentral orchestration. These features are beneficial for the product's security posture.

The solution could improve by using fewer hardware resources compared to other products like Palo Alto, which has better performance. 

Additionally, better integration of AI and machine learning for predictive analysis of potential threats could be beneficial. 

The technical support also needs improvement, including a better ticketing system and faster response times.

I have been using Sophos XGS firewall for more than 15 years, with approximately twelve years of precise usage.

I would rate the stability of Sophos XGS as a six out of ten. There have been observations of downtimes compared to other devices, and it doesn't perform as well as competitors like Palo Alto or Check Point.

Sophos XGS has scalability issues as it doesn't have features like cascading. Instead, it requires new devices to scale, unlike Palo Alto which allows adding devices to a pool.

The technical support is quite poor and needs significant improvements in response time and quality, especially for medium and small enterprises. It seems other brands face similar issues, but the costs rise for premium support, which is challenging for smaller entities.

Neutral

The initial setup of Sophos XGS is simple compared to other firewalls.

The pricing for Sophos products is considered high. The pricing model needs to be more flexible, catering differently to sectors like education, which might not require as high a price point.

I can recommend Sophos XGS for small to medium companies and the education sector. It is less ideal for enterprises with very high-security needs. Organizations with sensitive data should consider alternatives like Palo Alto or Fortinet.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

In some instances, we are using it in a virtual appliance in a VMware environment.

I will not rely on Sophos to build my infrastructure. For that, I will go to Fortinet or Palo Alto. However, from an end-user management perspective and the granular control and the reporting stuff, I still prefer Sophos. 

We are using Sophos as our internet gateway for specific sites that don't have to do with the backend tunneling and the infrastructure and all that stuff.

I have found some difficulties in other products, like in Fortinet, where there is no end-user visibility in a presentable form that non-technical people can interpret. I'm talking more specifically about non-technical management. You have to present something. Apart from that, the end-user integration is fine if you are using it for NCL and or as an internet gateway. Sophos allows for more visibility.

However, as far as infrastructure is concerned, if I have to apply this as a device in my data center or at any critical point, this device fails to perform. The hardware is not up to par. Even if I answered from proxy to transparent, transparent proxy to the full proxy mode, there are some hardware difficulties.

The centralized security is very good. 

The heartbeat system, the reporting management, and the electoral control that is achieved when the Sophos XGS is integrated with the Sophos endpoint is great.

It's close to the top of the line, alongside Trend Micro in terms of security reporting.

It is easy to set up.

I have observed that there are some reliability issues with these products in regard to the hardware performance and RMS.

I've witnessed many devices go down - even three on the same day. I've never seen that, for example, with Fortinet.

The stability could be a bit better.

I would like to have a proper SD-WAN orchestration solution. They are working on it. However, it still needs some improvement. Apart from that, it would be better if they provide the email gateway and the WAF not as a feature in the existing XG but as a dedicated appliance. Barracuda and Fortinet, for example, are providing dedicated services for the WAF and email gateway. Compared to that, Sophos is not up to the same level.

I've used the solution for around five years.

While their endpoint is a stable solution, their firewall needs to be improved in regard to integration with other products. I have specifically witnessed a case where we tried to integrate Sophos XG with the DLP product by Force Point. That wasn't supported right away. FortiGate was supporting that particular model.

I would like to have scalable products, however, normally what I have witnessed is that every new product that they push out or any additional feature that they push out in a new VMware version or specifically for the firewall may have some stability issues. So scalability at the cost of stability is not an option for me.

We have about 250 to 300 users. We have multiple branches that use this product. Usually, it's the development team, and hardware and software users. 

We may expand usage. It will depend on the additional sites we may operationalize soon.

I've had some direct escalation experiences with the country manager and their technical lead. I tend to get a good response.

While in general technical support can be better sometimes, as far as their resolutions are concerned, the team is providing us with technical assistance, and their approach to resolutions can be a bit tricky. Normally they try to avoid dealing with the solution so you have to dig it out and you have to work on it yourself, or you have to push them that there must be a solution.

Neutral

I have some expertise in Sophos and Fortinet; I'm not so sure about Cisco. We are also using Palo Alto.

We had some granular control in Sophos that was a bit advantageous to us. That's why switched. Also, the reporting, AD integration and the Sophos endpoint integration were key drivers in making the change.

The solution is simple to set up. It's not overly complex. It only takes a couple of minutes. 

YOu only need one person to handle maintenance. 

I handled the initial setup myself. 

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis, and it is fine. The renewal costs are typically reasonable. If you compare the general cost to Fortinet or Palo Alto, it's lower and more affordable. YOu can also pay for extra support.

We are a Sophos end-user.

For small enterprises or even for some enterprises that do not require large infrastructure, I would recommend Sophos right away. In Pakistan, we have to present something to the management and most of the time the management of the company is non-technical. So the presentability factor and the users' granular control and integration factor, make it attractive. This product can be used as an internet gateway. I have already recommended it to multiple users not for the infrastructure but for the internet gateway or as a proxy service.

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten. Some features still need improvement or to be built out, like  proper orchestrations or dedicated services.

All security solutions are the same. It depends on the size of the network and license. They have the same features. Brands provide extreme protection.

The solution is expensive.

I have been using Sophos XGS for four years.

The product is stable.

The solution is suitable for small and medium businesses.

Customer support is great.

Positive

The initial setup is easy and takes around 30 mins to complete.

The product’s pricing is average compared to other solutions.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.