SonicWall NSa Reviews

I use SonicWall NSa for bandwidth monitoring and aggregation. I also use it to control browsing.

What I like best about SonicWall NSa is the security it offers compared to other solutions in the market. Its reduction rate is also better than others.

SonicWall NSa has multiple areas for improvement.

One is that it doesn't have a proxy. It also doesn't have the quota management feature required in specific scenarios where you need to limit user bandwidth for a particular day, so one user isn't using up too much bandwidth compared to other users.

Active/Active HA is also missing in the product.

What I want to be added to SonicWall NSa in the future is the bandwidth optimization feature.

I've been using SonicWall NSa for fifteen years.

SonicWall NSa is a stable product.

To scale SonicWall NSa, you need to keep changing the model of the box, but this is the case in any other solution, so you go for hardware appliances, such as Fortinet, Sophos, Palo Alto Networks, and Check Point because after reaching a specific capacity, you need to change the model.

SonicWall NSa has good technical support, so support-wise, I'm giving it a ten out of ten.

Positive

My company chose SonicWall NSa over other products because it was good. It was better than others.

SonicWall NSa is easy to implement. It took two hours to deploy the product completely.

We implemented SonicWall NSa as we're SonicWall resellers.

There's ROI from SonicWall NSa, and its reduction rate is the best.

There are different pricing models for SonicWall NSa.

My company uses a next-generation firewall from SonicWall, SonicWall NSa.

I'm using version 2650 of SonicWall NSa.

My company is a SonicWall NSa reseller.

In the company, everyone uses SonicWall NSa, particularly fifty people.

My advice to people looking into implementing SonicWall NSa is that it depends on the setup. What my company does is first understand the setup and why the customer wants to deploy the product. Based on the customer's answers, my company presents solutions that would work. For example, if you require a proxy or a quota management feature, SonicWall NSa will not be a complete solution. If you need Active/Active HA, SonicWall NSa won't be the right match. You need to understand what you require from the product. If you need browsing and management turnovers, then SonicWall NSa will be good enough. Overall, the product still has some areas for improvement.

My rating for SonicWall NSa is seven out of ten. For me to give it a higher rating, it should have more features. Right now, I'm unable to market it well because it doesn't score very well in Gartner. I can only position SonicWall NSa as having the best reduction rate. The product is relatively good and stable but still needs certain features.

I'm using SonicWall NSa as an external firewall.

For me, the most valuable feature of SonicWall NSa is the UTM.

A room for improvement in SonicWall NSa is the log server because it could be more user-friendly compared to Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks.

Another area for improvement is the UI of SonicWall NSa, mainly because the rule set is challenging to review, and you always have to export the rule set for review. My company has many rule sets up for review, so sometimes, my team needs to use Excel for filtering, but the UI cannot support the Excel function.

In the next release of SonicWall NSa, I want the solution to be more user-friendly.

I've been working with SonicWall NSa for more than ten years.

SonicWall NSa is a stable solution.

I am still determining how scalable SonicWall NSa is.

SonicWall NSa support is fine overall. My company always gets help from the local vendor.

My company used Check Point ten years ago, but its pricing was higher than SonicWall NSa. The cost to maintain Check Point was also higher, so now the company uses SonicWall NSa.

SonicWall NSa is relatively easy to set up because my company always partners with local support.

It took one month to implement the solution because the company had to migrate from the old to the new, including checking the rule sets. I'm referring to upgrades because the deployment from scratch happened ten years ago, so I don't remember the details.

An in-house team implemented SonicWall NSa together with a local support team.

My company has yet to evaluate any ROI from SonicWall NSa.

SonicWall NSa has reasonable pricing. My company pays for it yearly, but I forgot how much the company pays. From what I remember, you only pay for the license fees.

I believe I'm using the latest SonicWall NSa version, 2700, though I'm not sure.

My whole company in Hong Kong uses SonicWall NSa, so that's about one hundred people. Mainly two people maintain the solution.

A few people took care of the deployment of SonicWall NSa.

I rate SonicWall NSa as nine on a scale of one to ten.

I'm a SonicWall NSa user.

We're using the solution as a gateway-level device.

It's good for firewall and gateway-level security. The VPN service is quite good, including the site-to-site VPN.

It works well for the corporate sector. 

Sometimes I have some queries, and the SonicWall support team resolves my queries.

It offers a very straightforward setup. 

I do not see any specific areas that need improvement. 

The solution can be a bit expensive. 

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

It's stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

SonicWall is scalable. Currently, I have two NSa 4600s and they are good for my users.

We have around 400 people using the solution. 

At this time, there is no plan to increase usage. 

Technical support has been good. 

Positive

I previously used Sophos.

The solution is easy to set up. It is also easy to deploy. How long it takes to deploy depends on your work culture and how you want to use it. 

For my organization, I deployed it with my support partner, and it has been working fine over the last few years.

There is a good ROI.

For some services, we have to pay for a license. We need to renew for either one or three years.

It can be quite expensive compared to other products with the same features. 

I have the on-premise model, and I have the TZ270. There are more than 20 devices.

I can recommend it to people who are somewhat technical. They would have no trouble with SonicWall products.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for just securing our users and creating a LAN through VPN tunnels. We use it to provide remote access to a cloud service.

It has allowed us to work remotely when the order to shelter in place went into effect in March of this year due to COVID-19.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is its ability to work like any other firewall.

The product is pretty easy to configure. It's easy to maintain and it works well with Windows.

There are features that offer 3G, 4G, failover, wireless, and things like that are very good. I'm not a firewall expert, however, in my opinion, the solution pretty much covers the needs of small and medium businesses.

Currently, I just have the basic modules turned on. I'd love to see how it works in terms of preventing more malware from getting through.

We still get phishing emails that manage to come through from time to time.

The solution could use a bit more security.

We had issues with the VPN tunnel between two sites. It wouldn't stay up. That was a problem for us. They need to fix it if they find it happens across the board to other customers.

This company has been using the solution for good three years.

The solution is stable. I've had one running for a little over 300 days without any problem. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The scalability is pretty good. I can scale out and add a firewall within a new office if I need to. If an organization wants to scale, they should be able to do so with no problems. Everyone working in our office uses the solution. Anybody that has a work laptop that needs to remote work from outside the office can do so as well. It's 100% used across the board.

I had to call support when one of my VPNs was failing. The VPN tunnel between two sites wouldn't stay up and they had us use a different security protocol.

They were very helpful. I found them to be quite responsive and knowledgeable. I don't think the problem with the VPN should have been there in the first place, however, that said, they did help us. I'd rate them, overall, at a nine out of ten.

The initial setup isn't too complex. My understanding is that it's straightforward. I didn't set it up myself, however, it's got configuration wizards to walk a user through. This no doubt is quite helpful and makes it pretty simple in terms of implementation.

The pricing is pretty reasonable. We don't find it to be overly expensive.

The version we are using is NSA 20 or 60.

If a company is looking for a good product that's easy to configure, I would suggest they consider SonicWall.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. If we didn't have that trouble with the VPN tunnel, I would give it a perfect score.

I use the solution to filter the IPs. Our users also use it for connectivity purposes.

The product blocks access when I visit unrecognized websites. The tool blocks some IP addresses.

The dashboard must be improved. The product should enable alerts. When hackers compromise our websites and applications, it will help us alert our staff and network administrators.

I have been using the solution for two to three years.

I rate the tool’s stability a seven out of ten. We face glitches sometimes.

I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten. We have approximately 1200 users in our organization.

My colleagues are happy with the response time and quality of support.

Positive

The setup is simple.

The solution is cheaper than others. It has a reasonable price.

I will recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to provide edge security. We provide edge policies and protection. We use a very old version.

I rate the performance an eight out of ten. The product is simple to manage. It is a good solution.

The scope of management must be improved. The scope of what users can do with the product must be improved. The product must enable integration with endpoint protection tools.

I have been using the solution for a couple of years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a five out of ten. We don’t need to scale. However, if we need scalability, we will have to change the solution.

The price is reasonable. The tool is cheap.

We did not see much improvement in our organization after using SonicWall NSa. We are evaluating other tools.

Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

When it comes to securing VLANs, the primary use case for SonicWall NSa is VPNs. 

Compared to Cisco, SonicWall NSa is much easier to configure. Cisco tends to be cumbersome through the web interface. It's easy through the command line, but when you're troubleshooting something, you're usually not going through the command line. When you're digging through data trying to find if something happened, you're usually digging through the logs, through the web interface, because it should be much easier. In Cisco, the logs are odd and you have to be really particular on what you want. You have to look for specific details. 

This process is much easier SonicWall NSa. I want to know where the problem started and where it ended, that's it; and it's really clear in SonicWall NSa. Whereas in Cisco it's just not clear at all.

It would be amazing if all of the ports on the throughput devices were 10 gig or 100 gig. That would make it so much easier for me to designate 10 gigs throughout the whole network. Right now, with SonicWall NSa, I'm doing designations like "use 10 gigs through the whole network until you hit firewall." In that case, all of the traffic that has firewall enabled on it drops to one gig.

That causes issues with throughput, especially when you're talking about data stores and Ice Guzzy, or when you're splitting things out with VLANs. 

MAC address filtering on the VPN and on the firewall itself would be a good thing to add as well. If it's there, I don't know where it is.

Automation would also be good. 

The implementation for VLANs is a little bit cumbersome. It would be good to make that a little bit easier.

I've used SonicWall probably on and off for the last couple of years. It depends on which client I'm working with.

SonicWall NSa is stable. 

Just adding multiple sites is easy. Clustering them is pretty straightforward. But if I needed to expand them in series, that's a little bit more complicated.

I've never used SonicWall tech support. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

Hire a network guy or have a service that's going to monitor and manage SonicWall NSa for you.

The solution is deployed on-premises. We're using the latest version. 

There are around 3,000 users of this solution in my company.

I like this solution because we are focused on VPN and have many brands that need to link a VPN and have security, like ransomware, spyware, and basic protection.

The cost could be lower. There could also be more flexibility for smaller companies. The cost to maintain SonicWall is quite high.

After updating the firmware, sometimes the solution stops working. I had to do a factory reset and reconfiguration to solve the problem. 

I have used this solution for about two years.

The solution is stable. I would rate the stability as seven out of ten. 

Technical support isn't bad, but it isn't the best. Sometimes, we don't receive the answers we're looking for, so we have to look it up on the internet. 

I would rate technical support as three out of five.

Setup isn't difficult, but it's not easy either. It depends on the experience of the person who is implementing the solution.

We use four people for maintenance. There's also a support team of three people.

SonicWall's technical support helped us with implementation.

We paid about 10,000 in our currency for one packet of SonicWall NSa.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.