SonicWall TZ Reviews

It is an easy solution to set up.

It's a stable solution.

Technical support has been helpful.

The price is good.

The solution doesn't have great scalability.

Getting support can be slow. 

The proxy feature is not so good.

They need to work on word filtering and also the SD-WAN.

With FortiGate, they provide an NAC solution. They provide FortiClient, which is an advanced feature. SonicWall doesn't provide NAC solutions, and even their SSL VPN client is not advanced.

I've been working with SonicWall since 2015 - almost seven years.

The solution has 98% stability. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

We have about 1,200 users on the solution. It's deployed to different departments and branches.

It's not really scalable. Not like FortiGate.

Technical support is knowledgeable, yet they are not fast. To be honest, they are good. 

In my organization, I'm working mostly for some other companies. I'm using different firewalls - except Forcepoint. I'm not working with Forcepoint right now, however, in terms of other products, I'm working with them.

The initial setup is very easy. It's not overly complex. 

Two people handled the deployment. It took about half a day. It was a very fast setup. 

For a small and medium implementation, it's quick, however, for an enterprise, it takes some time to configure the policy for the company.

I handle the deployment process for my clients. We use an internal team. We didn't open a case with SonicWall. If we face a problem, we open a case with them.

We've seen pretty good ROI so far.

The licensing is yearly based or three years. Their price compared to others is good.

We're end-users.

I'm not working on the latest version of the solution. I missed one or two updates.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. I'd recommend the solution to others. 

For protection, we follow the market standard. We configure the security policies, then the routing, starting routers, and then add policies, and configure the zones. Then we configure the application filtering, URL filtering, and all the security services which include Gateway Anti-Virus, IPS, then Botnet Filtering, and antispam.

The most common feature in the firewall, apart from that traditional firewall, would be the security services, like application control, URL filtering, Gateway Anti-Virus, and IPS protection. These are the essential features in the firewalls which I think, has to be enabled and properly used at every network infrastructure.

Though it is not as powerful and as good as the Palo Alto, Check Point, and Juniper firewalls, it is a small firewall and it is actually, highly acceptable for SMB customers where there is not much outflow of internet traffic and users are less in number. They can update or enhance the application signatures. They have that Capture ATP option, which is the sandboxing option there. Other than that, they can enhance the application signature, because, in SonicWall, the signatures of the application are not up-to-date. It is not a big database compared to Palo Alto, or Fortinet. It is slow and it takes time. 

If you have created zones it automatically creates the access policy for allowing traffic from one zone to another zone. Similarly, if you create a site-to-site tunnel or a remote tunnel, in that case, it will automatically stage the access policy. However, there are options to disable that auto-creation, but if you compare this with the other firewalls, other firewalls don't have that. This is basically one thing that SonicWall TZ can work on so that an unnecessary access policy doesn't get generated in the firewall. 

I have been working with SonicWall TZ for the past two and a half years.

It is stable. If there is less operation, it is stable. But if you have fifty to one hundred users, in that case, and if the operation increases, it is not stable. It will give a delay in some packet requests.

It is scalable. If the operation is less, it is scalable. But if the operation increases and the bandwidth consumption increases, it does not perform as per the expectations.

Technical support is very good. 

Positive

It is straightforward. It is out-of-the-box and anyone can configure it. The deployment takes less than one day. Basically, while they were deploying this TZ Series firewall, we didn't face any issues. But there are some old customers who had some issues with the IPs they had to set on from remote offices to the HO. In that case, we did that troubleshooting. Other than that, we didn't face any issues.

It comes to a range between five hundred to seven hundred dollars. The Fortinet firewalls range from five hundred to one thousand dollars. 

I would rate SonicWall TZ a seven out of ten.

It is for our company. We are not customers, we are direct clients. I am the end user.

The general feature is the antivirus policy, followed by the ransomware protection, and these are the features I was looking at. The VPN feature is not something that I'm a great fan of, but I mean, it is not something that I would even complain about. Whatever is required for my organization, the TZ 400 has performed admirably.

The user interface is a little challenging. It is not something I am familiar with. Things could go much more smoothly if they could be improved.

The interface and technical support are probably the two most important things that I would like SonicWall to improve. If the product that they have is to be phased out, there must be an upgrade in technology as well.

I have been working with SonicWall TZ for seven years.

The version we are working with is SonicWall TZ400.

SonicWall TZ is a stable product.

SonicWall TZ is scalable.

It was difficult to contact technical support online.

Before SonicWall TZ, I have not worked with another similar product.

I recently purchased a FortiGate from Fortinet. I am about to receive the delivery, which will most likely be in a fortnight, so I do not have much experience. We are planning to use Fortinet FortiGate, our plan is to switch from SonicWall to Fortinet.

The initial setup is smooth. It is not complex.

It can take an hour to two hours to deploy.

The vendor was able to assist us.

The prices are expensive. I wouldn't say the prices are reasonable.

Personally, I find it challenging. Previously, they had an Adobe Flash interface. When Adobe Flash was phased out and a new version was released, it was difficult for us to upgrade, and we received little help from the SonicWall team.

I had also purchased the SonicWall Analyzer. The Analyzer was also based on Adobe Flash, which they did not support. One must consider future expandability and the technology that is being deployed, as well as whether or not it is supported by the company if it is phased out.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a six out of ten.

SonicWall is perfectly okay for businesses that need to support around 100-150 users.

SonicWall is very expensive in terms of using it for 500 users. It's very expensive compared to Cisco Meraki. Cisco Meraki is half the price with the same features. Even FortiGate is less expensive than SonicWall.

I'd like to see anti-spam included in the standard license. I have to pay more for anti-spam when really it should be the standard feature.

I have been using SonicWall for about two years. 

No issues with stability. There's an automatic update that defines everything and then implements it to where I can see it on the dashboard. I can see all the spam or malware that was detected, as well as the vulnerability. It then stops those issues. 

General maintenance is okay, but if some users require changes, or I have to deploy some policy on the users, then the steps are actually pretty lengthy.

The only issue I have with scalability is the price.

I get in touch with technical support whenever we require the support, the support is okay. We have a toll free number to connect with them. I just connect support and then discuss the issues. They take control of my firewall and then make changes as per my requirement. That's fine. The support is more or less is good. That's not an issue.

I license SonicWall TZ for three years subscription and support. I would say the price is about 20% more when compared to the competition. The standard service for what my company needs is already covered in that license. But if I need more licenses like for VPN or some other filtering, then I need to pay more.

I worked with Meraki and Fortigate. I can differentiate the products in terms of ease of use. If I go for ease of use and deployability, then I would prefer Cisco Meraki in any case.

It's not user friendly as compared to Meraki.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

If an organization has about 200 users with slow growth, then SonicWall would be great. But if the growth is exponential and rapid, they may want to consider other solutions or SonicWall NSA.

We are primarily using SonicWall TZ for a VPN.

SonicWall TZ is very user-friendly and has network MAC binding. Additionally, the firewall works well.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for approximately three years.

Sometimes there is a glitch between the network connection. Last time, something happened on our IP phone,  the SonicWall team did some updates to fix the issue. However, glitches happen very rarely. I did not experience any other types of problems.

95% of the time the solution is operating well, the performance is good overall.

There are approximately 40 users using this solution and it is scalable.

I have used other solutions in the past, but I have found SonicWall TZ the most user-friendly.

The initial setup was not complex.

We used some help from the vendor for the implementation. When new implementations or devices are added we sometimes use the vendor for assistance.

The solution is low maintenance. There is some updating that needs to be done by the two-person IT team.

There are a few features that are licensed and there should be more that are licensed. The price of the solution is midrange compared to others, I have not had anyone complain.

I rate SonicWall TZ a nine out of ten.

I am a SonicWall certified professional, and my company has SonicWall MSP, as well as projects, security, and limited protection.

I am a reseller, as well as a Silver partner.

SonicWall TZ is primarily used by the NSA to secure internet network and products.

The most valuable feature is content filtering and app control.

I like to security with integrated thread prevention and SD-WAN.

SonicWall has many problems with the reporting analytics.

The reporting analytics could be improved, it is very unstable.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for approximately nine years.

SonicWall TZ is a stable solution.

It is a scalable product.

There are approximately 1,000 users among all of my customers.

I am an MSP SonicWall provider and about 50 SonicWall solutions spread across many customers, each with 10-100 users.

We intend to increase our usage because, in Brazil, we have a lot of problems with viruses, crypto viruses, and trojans. We can offer them security.

The initial setup was straightforward and simple.

It took approximately two hours to deploy the initial setup.

It can be deployed very quickly both on the cloud and on-premises.

I have a team of ten technical professionals to maintain and deploy this solution.

Licensing fees are on a anual or monthly basis.

There are no additional costs. It is only about support and license fees.

SonicWall is a good product that I enjoy using, and the security is superior to that of other security companies. It provides excellent protection.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a nine out of ten.

We use it for protection. We're about two versions behind the latest version.

It does exactly what it says on the tin. It is good for protecting the business from being compromised. Its port protection is very good.

It could probably be more user-friendly, and it could be more scalable with releases and subscriptions.

I have been using this solution for a few years.

Its scalability is not bad. It could be more scalable with releases and subscriptions. 

We have about 200 users.

I never needed their support.

I can't remember the old solution we had, but it was no good. So, we went to SonicWall.

It was a long time ago. From what I recall, it was pretty straightforward.

For deployment and maintenance, we have a technical team of around five internal people.

We have to pay yearly. Its licensing can be improved, and they should provide more features, such as AV, email filtering, and so on with the basic subscription.

There are a lot of products out there, and I don't have that much experience with any other product. If I have to buy a new product, I would probably review and do a comparison with SonicWall. 

Overall, I don't have any issues with the product. I like this product. It is very good. I would rate it an eight out of 10.

Our use case is that our email and CRM are in the cloud but the rest of the solution is here on our old server on premise. That includes file sharing and internal programs, too. We have some kind of replication of the cloud on premise to use in case of problems.

The feature with SonicWall that I have found most valuable is that all the models have the same interface. We don't need to learn different interfaces in the smaller or bigger models. The other thing is the actualization and upgrade politic are really strong, really good, very high quality. Lastly, the performance and the price are excellent.

I am really happy with the product. The new interface is really modern and really clear. The 7th generation is a really big improvement.

It has a very good design.

In terms of what could be improved. That is a very good question. Maybe the price could be lower. That is the only thing. Otherwise, it is really a very good product with really good performance. The only thing is maybe to lower the price a little bit - but it's not a complaint. I don't have complaints with SonicWall.

SonicWall is really a very complete product.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for five or six years.

SoinciWall TZ is really very stable.

Their scalability is wonderful. SonicWall has a migration table and it's easy to migrate the configuration of a small model to medium or all types. It's really easy. No problem. I have done this a few times and each time was perfect.

We have almost 100 users.

One person is enough for doing maintenance on SonicWall.

We do have plans to increase usage to more or less 10 or 20% more users next year.

The support is excellent

Previous to being introduced to SonicWall, I used Softforce.

The initial deployment is easy. Even in the case when a client has a particularly exotic configuration - the support is quick, fast, and very professional.

How long the deployment takes depends. Normally, the delays are the fault of the misinformation we receive from a client. Or misunderstanding the information the client provided us before we did the setup of the firewall. Normally it's not a problem with SonicWall.

We pay yearly or bi-yearly. Normally we offer the license for two or three years. But it's common to buy the license year by year.

My only recommendation is that you need to be a certificate holder to set it up and configure it. It's really important because it looks easy, but it is complex. You need to have the knowledge and experience. But this is normal for technical products. It is not a product for the regular user. It's for technical people. You need to have skills.

As a customer and a reseller, we feel they are doing a really good job.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give SonictWall TZ obviously a 10.

Our primary use cases are a site-to-site VPN connection, content filtering and in addition SSL VPN connectivity for remote desktops.

It provides our organization with very low throughput.

The site-to-site VPN connections, content filtering, and in our current remote working situation, SSL VPN remote desktop connectivity are the most valuable features. 

The areas we would like to see improvement include more features available similar to the equivalent FortiGate appliance, e.g. SSL encryption and inspection. Two-factor authentication capability would be another additional feature that could be included in the next release. 

I have been using SonicWall for 2 years. We have utilized SonicWall appliances for the last 7 years.

The overall stability has been good, there were no issues or concerns from the viewpoint.

We size our appliance based on the number of users, in this solution the TZ appliance was suitable for 30-40 users.

We experienced a very good level of support from the vendor and they have assisted us in real time via remote session when needed.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It took approximately 3-4 hours.

In comparison to competitors the license price is higher and as a suggestion, for 10-15 users potentially provide a free basic license.

We did evaluate the Fortinet FortiGate equivalent option.

It is cloud-based. I am managing it from my HQ to centralize all the branches connected with it, point-to point. I'm using the SonicWall for the gateway. Certainly I'm using it for DLP and antivirus logging, and we are using SonicWall firewall for the mail filtering. Also, we can use SonicWall firewall just like on SD-WAN. We can manage all our branches through that central point from their patches.

We have a centralized firewall here and it will take some bandwidth just like a broadband connection, but with low bandwidth or mobility connection. Through that, we can connect from the HQ to all our branches on those devices, through that particular antennae. All the data transmitted from the corporate office to branch offices works smoothly on the low bandwidth.

Because it is a software-developed feature in SonicWall, we just maintain the main firewall. With the main firewall routing there, we can do connectivity point-to-point. On the low bandwidth we can connect to all the branches from my corporate office.

In terms of what needs to be improved, I would say better load balancing and data filtering. This way we have low utilization of the net from the corporate office to all the branches. This is the connectivity there. The traffic from the HQ to all the branches goes on the low latency so that connectivity is continuous and not dropped.

In the next release it should have both the failure and load balancing combined on there. Whenever there is a failure and whenever they are load balancing, it should auto-generate the traffic for any connectivity on there, so it will run smoothly. It should also generate the alert.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for the last 10 years. We're using the SD-WAN solution from SonicWall.

This solution is quite stable.

Scalability is more than fine.

We have around 500 users with connectivity on it.

We do have plans to increase usage.

Technical support is good, there is no issue.

I am comfortable with them all: SonicWall, Check Point, Palo Alto, Sophos. Right now, I'm using the Sophos 225 and 125 in my offices and have a XG 862 in all the branches connected from there. I work on that firewall installation and also the NetScaler on the Citrix. That's simply fundamental. There are some differences with the connectivity and ruling. The rule tab is the same.

I work on their Azure AD platform and also Exchange. On the Exchange, I am working on the O365.

I am also using Trend Micro, Symantec, and McAfee.

This technology comes with these different platforms and you go on the previous one from a couple years ago. The SD-WAN-only technology is not that common. It costs more from US, Canada and from that area of connectivity. It will drop the packet from there.

It has an easy setup. You can centralize all the connectivity. This OS is running with each and everything, and you can monitor it all from the centralized point.

I also give the support for Exchange, but this will take low bandwidth and low latency from any mobile connectivity, any internet, any low-bandwidth connectivity and work fine. But other products like McAfee and Symantec can support the Exchange.

It can take time for the synchronization of updating the devices. This depends on how many devices we have connecting from the portal and which devices they are working on. Sometimes, you have the scanning on there. So it will take that functionality and we can define for root causes on the other things. We can define according to policy. So this depends on the policy design. It also depends on that criteria.

On a scale of one to 10, I would give SonicWall TZ a nine.