WatchGuard Firebox Reviews

The most valuable features of the WatchGuard Firebox are all the security and updated features. You are able to configure the solution from the cloud platform and the application and web interface are very nice.

Since I have been using this solution I have not been hacked or had any problems.

They are working on cloud-based options. However, they do not have the options fully functional in their solution at this time.

I have been using WatchGuard Firebox for approximately five years.

WatchGuard Firebox is stable.

The scalability of the WatchGuard Firebox is good.

The technical support is good from WatchGuard Firebox.

The initial setup was easy, and the time it took was a couple of hours.

The price of the WatchGuard Firebox is reasonable.

I rate WatchGuard Firebox an eight out of ten.

Watchguard Firebox is easy to use and easy to configure.

The reporting could use improvement, because most of the firewalls available in the market come with the reporting built-in, with the memory and the hard disk capacity and all. With WatchGuard, the models we use, none of them support that part. 

I have been using this solution for over 10 years.

It's really good for X and B level organizations due to the cost and the features. As a medium-level businesses, we are satisfied. 

We have a regional office in Hong Kong, and our director and the owner of the company lives there. He prefers this solution so both companies can have the same product. That makes it great for negotiation and troubleshooting.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

We use a local vendor, Blue Chip Sri Lanka, who is very good. 

Our license is for a three year subscription. 

I evaluated Sophos, but the cost was a little bit higher than this solution, so we went with this one instead. 

I rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

When choosing a product, make sure you understand your organizations requirements. Whatever the product you choose should ultimately match with your organization's number of users plus maintenance costs. 

We use Watchguard as a firewall and a VPN.

WatchGuard has improved our security.

The most valuable features are the VPN and web blocker security.

An area for improvement is that when we use a web administration link, there is no security.

I've been using WatchGuard for the past five years.

Watchguard is stable.

This solution is scalable.

The technical support is very fast - when we raise an incident, we get a solution in no time.

I previously used FortiGate.

The installation was straightforward and took between one and two hours. I would rate our experience with the initial setup as four out of five.

I installed this solution by myself.

We're currently renewing our license on a three-year basis. The licensing costs are comparatively lower than other providers, and I would rate the pricing as five out of five.

I would give this solution a rating of eight out of ten.

WatchGuard Firebox is our daily firewall. It gets used on a regular basis.

It is deployed locally. We are using its latest version.

Their support is excellent, and the stability is very good.

Some of the configuration options are somewhat confusing.

It has been very stable.

Their support is excellent.

It is very stable and fairly easy to use.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

We are a solution provider and WatchGuard is one of the product lines that we implement for our customers. I am the person in the company that is responsible for WatchGuard products.

We do not use this product in my organization. I'm enabling partners and providing training for them on how to use this technology and how to sell it.

I assist customers with implementing PoC installations in different environments.

This product has a dashboard on the cloud that manages logs coming for the WatchGuard Firebox and workstations. It is a good product but it is not a fully integrated EDR or endpoint solution.

This product is one that not many customers request.

The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices.

If there is a traditional antivirus solution installed on the machine then we can use it with this solution, helping to protect the endpoint from zero-day attacks.

This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them. If it were fully integrated with WatchGuard Firebox then it would make sense.

I began working with WatchGuard products approximately two years ago but WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is one that I have not been working with for a long time.

Scalability is very good because it's just an endpoint and therefore, it is managed through the cloud. There are no challenges.

Technical support for this product is perfect. If you open a ticket with them, even with the slowest SLA, they reply to you within four hours. You can also request that they open a remote session with you.

Quite some time ago, I had experience with Sophos products as a distributor in Egypt.

I also have experience with products by Fortinet. I have been evaluating Fortinet because they are one of our competitors.

The initial setup is very straightforward. The length of time required for deployment depends on the number of endpoints that we are dealing with.

For a new setup, we can complete the bulk of the deployment at one time, but it is better to schedule it. This also depends on the number of endpoints because if it is huge then it will take time. A small number of endpoints, such as 20 machines can be completed in perhaps one to two hours.

The number of people required for deployment also depends on the number of endpoints.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service for all our properties for network security.

The most important feature of this solution is the SLAs.

Multi properties could be added to the solution in the future to make it better.

I have been using WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is scalable.

The support could improve. I had to deal with support to give me new hardware and it took four weeks.

I have used Fortinet solutions and they are the best.

The implementation is very complex, you install the application for WatchGuard.

The price of the solution is not expensive, it is less than FortiGate.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service a five out of ten.

The big issue with data-loss protection is the end-to-end encryption between the user and whatever site they're connecting to. And that diminishes the effectiveness of the data loss protection because it can't inspect all of the data contents. Formatting is still reliant on numbers, letters, and sequences recognizable as credit cards, driver's license birthdays, etc. There's a lot of other sensitive material that could be at a client site, for example, that doesn't have a known methodology. It can be challenging to set it up to recognize instances of information unique to an environment. Unfortunately, it's even the case with a company like Microsoft. I would compare it to the data loss protection within Office 365 and say that it has the same inherent problems that you see with any encrypted email.

WatchGuard Data Loss Prevention catches so little. When I've implemented it, it just can't look at the traffic in a thorough enough manner to capture as much as it should. And I find that I'm disenchanted with all data loss protection solutions I've tested and looked at. WatchGuard certainly is not any better or worse than the others. It's just not a technology I have much faith in. 

You can get awfully granular in the setup, but it reminds me of antivirus software. True antivirus software catches very little. It's rare that antivirus software identifies a true virus. Everything's becoming more complicated, so now you need to look at detection and correlated threat response systems that are more effective than traditional antivirus. Data loss protection, I'm afraid, is kind of in that space.

We've used Watchguard Data Loss Prevention off and on for several years depending on the client's needs.  

Overall, I have utilized WatchGuard solutions for at least 20 years. I have been with them as they switched from private to public ownership and back again. So I've been a pretty faithful user for an excessive amount of time.

I find that their tech support is excellent. And as a reseller, my relationship with my point of contact is also strong. WatchGuard does a good job of maintaining that. So even if you are not getting the best response from support, you have a method to escalate it. I have so few incidents where I need to reach out to support. My most recent incident was handled very quickly, but with my experience, I don't have to call them often. At most, I maybe contact them once or twice a year. I have a lot of WatchGuard devices in service with my clientele.

It's a very simple setup.

I've never licensed it as a separate solution. It's always included in the licensing that would be appropriate for a medical facility, so I've never purchased DLP as an add-on to their basic licensing. I wouldn't say that I can give you a straight answer. It's never even come up in conversation to license it as a standalone solution.

I would rate WatchGuard five out of 10, but all of the data loss protection solutions I've looked at would be in that five range. I haven't found one that I would put much faith in.

Honestly, I think that data loss protection is just part of a whole configuration. Let's say you need granular control, reporting, and things of that nature. In that case, you need to do an extensive job configuring the firewall. It's probably insufficient to run the quick setup wizard and say that's good enough. So if you're looking to implement a feature like data loss protection, you probably need to have a relatively advanced technical person doing that configuration. So it's not difficult. But conceptually, to be effective, you need to have an excellent understanding of firewalls and firewall methodology.

We use WatchGuard Firebox for network security in our offices.

The main features of the solution are the control of the site-to-site network access and the overall features.

The solution can improve by adding a feature to tag a MAC address of a computer system in the policy and more IP configuration settings.

I have been using this solution for approximately ten years.

We did not need to use technical support.

The implementation of the solution was done by our IT management team.

I rate WatchGuard Firebox an eight out of ten. 

We are using it for firewalling and providing wireless network connectivity for access points. It is a standard product for our infrastructure. 

We can implement it very easily. There are some standards that we can explain to our colleagues. It is easy to maintain the same type of installation at various customer locations. It is easy to pass on the information to our team about how to implement it in the same way.

The ease of use is most valuable. You can quickly train someone who hasn't seen a firewall in life. You can get people up to speed, and in a few months, they are able to manage this product very easily. It is a very user-friendly, scalable, and stable product. Its price is also spot-on.

Its documentation could be improved. Sometimes, you need to search a bit longer to find what you are looking for.

I have been using this solution since 2014.

It is a very stable product. Usually, we have several years of uptime on WatchGuard Fireboxes. They can run for very long without any issues.

It is very scalable. We have several customers with several sites, and we can easily extend the network by using Fireboxes at several sites with site-to-site tunnels. If you use the WatchGuard system management software, you can even drag two Fireboxes together, and they automatically make their own tunnel. You don't even have to perform any additional tasks. It is very user-friendly in terms of scalability.

We get good support. It can take a bit longer only in the case of a specific problem that even they are not aware of, but that's the case with many of their competitors. In general, their support is very good.

It is fairly easy to deploy. You can also deploy it remotely. It provides a very easy and out-of-the-box experience.

It has a very good price. It is not the most expensive one, and it is also not the cheapest one. It is just spot-on in terms of price.

We evaluated Fortinet and Cisco. We chose WatchGuard because we wanted our engineers to be able to learn and work with the product in a very short amount of time.

When comparing Fortinet and WatchGuard, in the past, Fortinet was before WatchGuard in providing the features for directly resolving DNS names and hostnames and making additions to the rules. A few months later, WatchGuard also implemented these features. Nowadays, it goes both ways.

I would advise others to definitely take the WatchGuard Essential Security training course, which is a four-day or three-day course. It really gives a broad overview of the product. You get a good, basic, and overall feeling of the product. You can take it in groups. We normally go with four to five engineers of our company. Most of the time, after that course, you can implement the basic product and even scale it out to many more locations without requiring additional training.

I would rate WatchGuard Firebox a nine out of ten. I am pretty satisfied with this solution.

We provide the solution to our customers. It's primarily used for security.

The reporting aspect of the solution is what is most valuable to us.

The solution is very easy to configure.

The product has been very easy to use.

We've found the stability to be very good.

The scalability is excellent.

The pricing of the product is reasonable.

We've been in touch with technical support and found them to be very helpful.

There are many fantastic features.

Often, customers don't end up using a lot of the features.

They should move more towards integration with other OEMs such as web application firewalls, et cetera. There should be better integration and a way to configure multiple vendors into the same data center in order to offer more flexibility. 

We've been working with the solution for about seven to eight years at this point. It's been a while. 

The stability of the solution is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite reliable in terms of performance.

We've found the scalability to be very good. There are no limitations. If a company needs to expand it, they can.

We've contacted technical support in the past. We've found them to be very good. They are helpful and responsive. I would say that we are quite satisfied with the level of support we've received.

The pricing of the product is pretty good. I would describe it as fair. It's not overly expensive.

One of our customers wanted us to compare this solution against Azure Firewall to see which would be better. We're still looking into that.

We are resellers.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's a pretty fantastic solution overall.