Sophos Firewall Reviews

We don't have remote workers, so Sophos XG is only used for our in-house applications and users within the same building. For remote access, we use the Sophos free firewall home edition to connect to the Sophos XG 450, so there was no problem when the license was still activated. We experienced problems currently since the license is no longer activated.

The user interface of Sophos XG enhances our administrative tasks because it is intuitive and easy to navigate.

We find the network security, protection, and web features most effective for threat prevention.

Sophos XG has facilitated better traffic management because the model we purchased is only utilizing resources at 40%. We have no bottlenecks, unlike the previous Cyber Room model that we purchased, which was at 85% resource utilization, causing traffic problems. With 40% resource utilization, we don't experience problems with all the features of the base firewall, such as IPS.

They could change their licensing model, simplify it, and make it more available to upgrade. We are looking into upgrading or refreshing these firewalls since they will be end of life. We are looking to replace it with another firewall with a five-year license, at least, so that we can survive.

I have been working with Sophos XG since 2020.

I am struggling with the licensing model of Sophos XG because we don't have a license. Our licenses expired and we're not supposed to renew the licenses at this time.

We are looking into other brands, including FortiGate because it's closer to Sophos XG. I'm also looking at Sangfor because they say it has better web and network protection. Our objective is to find a solution that is price-wise and affordable for us, with longer coverage and good web application firewall features and network protection for five years license.

I haven't concluded my research on the advantages Sangfor has over Sophos XG yet, but Sangfor has better pricing and states that if the license expires, all the features until the day subscribed prior to termination of the license remain active. This is appealing for us to explore, and we will be asking for a model or POC for that product in the next few weeks. FortiGate comes with an appliance and is somewhat expensive. We're considering Sangfor, Sophos XG, and FortiGate because these are the appliances that we think are affordable for us.

Sophos XG Firewall has improved our network security posture only partially because we don't have the license, so it's just the base license that we are using currently. When we had the license activated, there was no problem, but now that we don't have a license, it reverts back to the base license features only.

We are not so much concerned about the reporting and analytics tools in Sophos XG. I have seen that of Sophos XG 450; it's not comprehensive. I hope Sophos XG 4300 will be better with updated features for reporting because we had problems with minimal reports for the Sophos XG 450. I haven't seen the material white paper on Sophos XG 4300 on the reporting feature yet, but from what I've read, it's still not on par with FortiGate. I don't know about Sangfor yet, so we still have to check on that.

I would still recommend the Sophos XG firewall to others, particularly the Sophos XG 4300, depending on the price. I would also recommend some other vendors when it comes to firewall.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Sophos XG an 8 out of 10.

On-premises

I am using Prisma Access browser, but the terms are different in Palo Alto, as every firewall has different functions and names for the access browser.

Regarding the firewall itself, I work with Palo Alto VM-Series firewall, which is very good compared to others; its rating is very good.

We are using the Cortex series.

I use Cortex XSOAR mainly for XDR, Cortex XDR. I specifically use XDR for extended detection and response.

The security orchestration, automation, and response features of Cortex XSOAR are very advanced, and the functions are rated highly compared to others.

Currently, we are not using Cortex XSOAR for SOAR functionality. Because we have not been using it for a long time, our option is based on our organization needs; we are not a big organization with a total of 150 plus users, and the option we use currently is enough for our network, so we are not using DNS Security and other options.

Palo Alto Threat Intelligence Management is a main function of Palo Alto.

The Palo Alto solution is very useful in our environment, as the pricing from the Palo Alto team working in Pakistan is also very competitive compared to Sophos XG and Fortinet.

We are not using Palo Alto Threat Intelligence Management for a long time, but it is very effective.

The reporting and visibility of the network were low.

There are many problems, but compared to pricing, Sophos XG is good.

We need better reporting and a clear vision of the network, and Sophos XG does not provide that.

I have been using Cortex XSOAR for only 3 months.

There were no limitations regarding the scalability of Sophos XG.

I stopped using Sophos XG around 3 months ago.

I used Sophos XG, the XGS version, which is friendly with the current version of XGS. I have around 10 years of experience using Sophos XG as my main gateway device.

Sophos XG is a friendly-use firewall that is very good for small environments and small to medium businesses; its functions are great, and I am very satisfied with UTM. I have been using it for 10 years with no threats in my network, no ransomware attacks, and no VPN issues. It works very well in my environment, as my network is not as crucial as a financial institution's.

Installation is very easy. The installation of Sophos XG was easily completed with our local vendor.

My job title is Assistant Manager IT.

This review will be published on peerspot.com, in written or audio format, and it can be available to other people, but I can stay anonymous if I wish. I will get notifications, and the use of this review is subject to PeerSpot's terms of use, which I can access at peerspot.com/tos.

I do not use AutoFocus.

I appreciate the contribution and pleasant discussion.

My rating for this solution is 10 points out of 10.

On-premises

Other

I use Sophos XG for security products and have two lower sites. One is for production, and one is for security. I use it for security. For our management team, I will use it for production in the future. We focus on network security, and for threat protection, customers also use other products like Bitdefender and Kaspersky on their workstations and servers.

For network security, I use Sophos XG for entire network protection. The AI-enhanced security features are important to me, as they provide enhanced features for business reporting and automation. Our customers are also happy because of its AI capabilities, which satisfy them in terms of security features. Sophos XG focuses on network security, a crucial aspect for me.

The main improvement needed is in the pricing. It is a little higher when compared to competitors like Huawei. There are many Chinese products in Myanmar, and their prices are more competitive. Sometimes, for budgets with limitations, I offer Chinese products like Huawei. Additionally, Sophos XG's response time is sometimes delayed due to time zone differences in customer support.

I have been using Sophos XG for one year.

I rate the stability of Sophos XG as eight out of ten because there are sometimes delays in response, likely due to time zone differences.

I have tried Sophos's technical support, and it's okay. If I rate it, I would give it an eight out of ten.

Positive

It's not difficult for me and my team to install, but technicians need experience.

Three to five engineers usually take part from our side in maintenance.

The pricing is a little higher compared to Chinese products like Huawei. For those on a limited budget, I sometimes prefer Huawei. However, if the customer focuses on security features and reliability, I don't use Chinese products.

Comparisons were made with competitors like Huawei, Fortinet, and other Chinese products.

I recommend Sophos XG to other customers. For overall reliability, network security, threat protection, and everything, I rate it nine out of ten. The AI-enhanced security features are significant and satisfying. Reporting and automation features are valuable. Sometimes, there are delays in customer support responses due to time zone differences. Overall, I rate the solution nine out of ten.

On-premises

We sell Sophos XG devices.

Sophos XG includes all basic features and has a secured proxy mechanism. Network security proxy authentication is available through a web-based proxy. The older proxy mechanism is not there. Pricing is very competitive, much cheaper compared to other brands like Palo Alto, Check Point, and Fortinet. Additionally, the performance of the hardware has been increased, although it is not negligible compared to other brands.

The direct proxy or proxy mechanism is missing. Legacy applications should have this option, but Sophos XG has removed it. This feature was available in UTM nine but not in XG.

I have been using Sophos XG for one or two years.

Deploying Sophos XG was not difficult. It took a couple of weeks to fully deploy the solution, and the process was quite fast and not complicated.

I have premium support from Sophos, and the support is good. They respond well and have a good support team.

Neutral

Pricing of Sophos XG is very good compared to other brands. The pricing is very cheap. For example, if Palo Alto is priced at 200, then Sophos is priced at 75, which is a significant difference.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the overall solution between seven and eight.

I use Sophos XG as a channel partner, providing it to our customers for next-generation firewall solutions, Wi-Fi access points, and other security features. My customers include industries such as banking, manufacturing, IT, hospitals, and healthcare.

I regard Sophos XG as a superior choice among firewalls due to its advanced security, user manual, and control panel features, among others. The firewall offers effective policy management, bandwidth management, and group policy features from a sales perspective. 

Additionally, customer support is highly regarded, with a technical representative swiftly addressing customer queries through the Sophos partner portal.

Sophos XG is reaching its end-of-life and end-of-support; therefore, the user count limitation of particular models should be improved.

I have been working with Sophos XG for around five to six years.

I would rate the stability of Sophos XG as ten out of ten.

I rate scalability as ten out of ten, indicating that it is easy to scale up for a larger number of users.

The technical support from Sophos XG is excellent. When my customers raise a ticket, a customer representative calls them immediately to address their queries. I rate customer service nine out of ten.

Positive

The setup process is easy and I would rate it ten out of ten.

My customers see a return on investment and value for money with Sophos XG.

I consider the pricing reasonable; it depends on the model and license type, like one-year, two-year, or five-year licenses. Compared to other firewalls like Fortigate, SonicWall, and Palo Alto, I find Sophos XG cost-effective. 

I highly recommend using Sophos XG for enhanced security purposes and organizational structure implementation. Furthermore, I rate Sophos XG as ten out of ten.

On-premises

My main use case for the Sophos XGS is as a perimeter firewall, and it has a WAF, web filtering, IDS, and email protection.

The most useful features in Sophos XGS are the web filter and IDS, along with email protection; those are the features that I use mostly.

Email protection is the IDS, and there's also the Web Application Filter that I find useful.

Regarding the synchronized security in Sophos XGS, the feature is automatically enabled if you have Sophos Endpoint, allowing them to synchronize through the cloud to communicate together. I find the feature useful and effective.

Sophos XGS helps to identify threats effectively, but it relies on the rules set in the IPS and IDS policies. In Sophos, we rely on the reports to see categorized attacks in progress, and we can then observe what has happened.

To improve Sophos XGS for the next release, I recommend enhancing visibility as it's the biggest challenge. There should be more details on visibility.

I have been working with Sophos XGS Firewall since 2018.

I haven't faced any challenges; they usually provide support whenever an issue arises and work on it until it's resolved.

I haven't faced any stability issues; it's perfect. I'm satisfied with its performance.

For scalability, you purchase it according to the number of users and traffic; scaling means you would have to buy another product if you exhaust resources, but what we are using is enough to support our load.

So far, we are monitoring to see if we'll increase, but we are below the capacity of the device.

The support is great, and it's sufficient to help me. I would rate the support a perfect 10.

Positive

Before working with Sophos XGS, I evaluated other firewalls including Fortinet, using a smaller version of it, along with Untangle and Cisco Firepower.

The main driver to moving to Sophos was the price and value evaluation; the price was reasonable, and they provided enough features that we needed, as the previous firewalls were limited in traffic and number of users.

It's easy to set up, and they provide support to help through the process.

We were working with the provider and implementing it in parallel with what we had before, ensuring everything was moved before switching.

I find the cost of the firewall to be moderate; it's reasonable.

With Sophos XGS, there are no limitations on the number of users, and the setup is easy.

I would recommend that those planning to use Sophos XGS find it easy to use and deploy, and it works well, but they may need another tool for better visibility.

Sophos XGS helps to identify threats effectively, but it relies on the rules set in the IPS and IDS policies.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Sophos XGS an eight.

On-premises

Most of our customers want to block their websites, especially those in the financial sector. They desire access to only required websites while blocking the rest. We have also installed certificate-based scanning for inspection.

Sophos XG provides us with unlimited VPN users, which is very useful. Its in-built reporting functionality is also highly beneficial. Additionally, we are currently utilizing the threat intelligence features.

Sophos XG should concentrate on improving SD-WAN solutions. Currently, the in-built GUI doesn't support configuring SD-WAN. If configuration from the firewall itself was possible, it would be very useful for us. Presently, we rely on Sophos Central to make configuration changes.

I have been working with Sophos XG for over six years.

I would rate the stability of Sophos XG as a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Sophos XG as a six out of ten. There is room for improvement in the scalability aspects.

The technical support from Sophos is good and satisfactory.

Positive

The initial setup of Sophos XG is simple.

The pricing for Sophos XG is comparatively low. Compared to other firewalls, it is low in price.

I would compare Sophos XG to SonicWall. SonicWall has multiple features, including inbuilt endpoint security and a lot of features compared to Sophos XG.

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

Hybrid Cloud

I use Sophos XG mainly as a gateway. It also serves as the DHCP server on my network and is utilized for web control.

The Sophos XG offers intuitive configurations, which is primarily what I find valuable. It is easy to configure due to its graphical interface, reducing the reliance on specialized IT personnel and cuts down on time used for support and troubleshooting.

The reporting side could use improvement. Having more reports on the dashboard would be beneficial. While there might be different tools or licenses for various purposes, having more reports available would be helpful.

I have been working with Sophos XG for nearly five years. I started with Cyberoam and then transitioned to Sophos.

The deployment process was smooth. There were trained engineers available, and it was easy for my team to adopt.

The solution has been stable. It's on 24/7 and has consistently been reliable over the years.

I have not had the need to scale, which might be due to having more capacity than needed.

I rely on local vendor support, so I haven't directly engaged with Sophos technical support.

Neutral

Before Sophos, I used Linux-based firewalls that I configured myself. Cyberoam was my first physical firewall, which naturally progressed to Sophos due to cost considerations and local support.

The initial setup was straightforward. It wasn't a lengthy project, and within three days, the deployment was completed.

I did not use a specific project methodology. I followed my regular project plan, which included an initial meeting to kick off the deployment.

I benefit from reduced reliance on specialized IT skills, especially during staff turnover. The graphical interface of Sophos XG simplifies configurations, saving time in support and troubleshooting compared to the Linux-based solution I previously used.

The decision to go with Sophos was influenced by pricing and strong local support.

During my evaluation process, I looked at Cisco and Palo Alto in addition to Cyberoam.

For organizations considering Sophos, it is important to evaluate their network deployment plan, especially if they have a hybrid environment. They should consider if Sophos XG, in its basic deployment, can provide sufficient security or if additional tools are required. I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

On-premises