Sophos Firewall Reviews

We use and implement Sophos XG for our customers for border security, just to make sure that nobody gets in and that everybody who tries to get out will have some kind of filter or protection.

I can say that it has not exactly improved how our the organization functions, but on the security side it makes everything much more secure, especially for the users. They can't surf the web without some kind of protection for safety and control, and we are alerted if somebody is trying to access some strange websites or trying to access something the company does not allow.

The features that I have found most valuable are first the Web Filter and the Web Application Firewall SD-Wan on Version 18. Additionally, RED Tunnels allows a Sophos vital to speak to another Sophos vital in headquarters.

The main problem with Sophos XG today is that it doesn't have a feature where you actually know the quality of an international link, which would allow us to we know if the link is operational or not. We need more information. It's losing packets on the network. It's high latency. So, we need more information to know if the link is really bad or really good, and today, we only know if it's working and this just isn't enough.

I have been using Sophos XG for about six, seven years.

Sophos XG is really robust because of all the implementations you currently have active. We don't have problems on the hardware or a bug on the software or anything like that. It's really, really rare. Most of the problems are from requests for our customers asking to make a particular website available for some parts of the company and things like this. Just some little configurations on the web filter.

We actually do studies to already know before implementation which firewall will be able to handle all the operations. It is really rare to need to change the firewall or to miss a configuration and put in equipment that can't handle the network. We have never had a case where we had to replace a hardware because it couldn't handle the network. It has always been easy to make a survey to get the right equipment for the right amount of people, and every time we need to make a new implementation we have the study making scalability easy, because each hardware is for a specific customer.

If I were to rate support from zero to 10, I would say about six or seven. The Portuguese Support is really bad. It's really not good. Every time you have an issue that's a little bit more complex, it's better to speak to the Global Support than the Latin American Support.

Today the initial setup is simple since we have been using it for a long time and have implemented it for several customers. So now it is really easy for us.

We are the resellers.

My advice to anyone considering Sophos XG is that it has a good cost-benefit. Let's just put it that it does the job right.

On a scale of one to ten, I would say Sophos XG is a nine.

We provide Sophos XG to customers. We work at deploying this solution from scratch to the customer, from unboxing, racking, or stacking, and doing licensing and upgrades for the box. Then we establish the process and security profiles that the customer requires. 

This solution is deployed on-prem. 

Some of the most valuable features are filtering and application control. The DDoS detection also shows traffic jamming and traffic shaping. 

This solution could be improved with more effective bandwidth. I found that when I enable DDoS detection for our clients, bandwidth is reduced. If DDoS detection is disabled, the bandwidth will be high, but it isn't secure. We recommend that customers enable DDoS detection, but if they need high bandwidth, we recommend Palo Alto and FortiGate instead of Sophos. 

I have been using Sophos XG for about six months. 

This solution is not as stable as other products. In terms of stability, our number one recommendation is Palo Alto, number two is FortiGate, and number three is Sophos. 

Sophos is scalable, but not enough. 

Sophos technical support is effective. 

The installation takes two days. It is easy to deploy, and not as complicated as Palo Alto or FortiGate. We make it in our company labs and, for deployment and maintenance, we recommend one or two people. 

We provide and implement this solution for customers. 

The licensing for Sophos XG is based on the number of users, so I get the module from the sizing of the customer. 

We also recommend that customers use FortiGate and Palo Alto, since these solutions are more stable and have more effective bandwidth. 

I rate Sophos XG a seven out of ten. I would recommend it to others, based on their needs, but the stability could be better. 

We have five to seven customers who are using Sophos XG. 

The firewall is used to maintain security. Basically, it's used to make sure that our clients' corporate network is secure. We want to make sure that their email is scanned, protected, and so on.

In terms of the functionality, I think it's pretty straightforward. It's easy to pick up. It's also user-friendly.

Support could be improved.

I have been selling Sophos XG for two years. It is deployed on-premise. 

When it comes to scalability, of course we can upgrade. A lot of firewalls don't allow upgrades. An upgrade would mean changing the box. For our customers, a lot of the functions of the firewall don't reduce. We just need to make sure they enable the security, and then make sure it's giving the protection to the client.

For scalability when it comes to the server, I can add the RAM, the hard disc, and the CPU to boost up the performance. 

The principal tech support is not very present in Malaysia. We are relying on the distributor. Most of the technical things we can handle on our own, like when it comes to setup. When it comes to the issues related to product hardware or software bugs, we will reach out to them. But the response is from the distributor.

The support could be a bit better.

Installation for each version, like Fortinet and Next Generation Firewall, is simple. Based on how familiar we are with the client, it can take a day or two.

We only need one or two people for deployment.

For every firewall, you will need to pay the license for the following year. If they don't pay for the license renewal, they basically won't get the support from Sophos.

They do have their own integration, so I don't really have much to comment about Sophos because we basically just maintain the Sophos Firewall that we supply. We don't do a lot of fancy design work.

We are currently still evaluating the solution.

We use Sophos XG with medical institutions and corporate banks that we work with. There are approximately 20 employees working with this product in our company.

Being centralized, Sophos provides us threat protection there. Even with standalone, we are able to provide the Sophos firewall. Having an internal dashboard and a single dashboard with some endpoints is also valuable. By using Sophos endpoint and the firewall, synchronized security is easy.

I would like to see improvement with service and support. LAN inbound and outbound traffic requires more control and an additional stop. 

We have been using Sophos XG for almost 10 years. We are partners with Sophos.

Stability and performance is good.

The solution is easy to scale.

There is no maintenance required with Sophos XG because it is a cloud product.

Previously I was using Cyberoam and Fortinet. We switched because there was a lot of hardware, and the performance was not satisfactory. We were experiencing space concerns with the hardware, the dual processor, and even the single processor. This also meant that synchronized security was not there as well.

The initial set up of the solution was simple. It took about 20 minutes.

We implemented the software on our own.

The price is cheaper compared to others.

I would recommend Sophos XG because it is easy to deploy at customer locations and it is priced well. I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.

We use Sophos XG for network security as a firewall for our company.

I have found configuring the ports to be easier in Sophos XG compared to the other devices.

Sophos XG could improve the policies, they are a bit confusing when creating them. There are many options that make it confusing and it could be simplified.

I have been using Sophos XG for approximately two years.

The Stability and performance are quite good. We haven't seen any problems.

The solution is scalable.

I would rate the scalability of Sophos XG an eight out of ten.

We have approximately 10 people using this solution in my organization.

My customers are using this solution on a daily basis.

I have contacted support once or twice to receive some clarification. I had a good experience.

I have used other solutions preciously and FortiGate's user interface is much easier to use when compared to Palo Alto and Sophos. Additionally, in Palo Alto, assigning the ports are more user-friendly.

The installation is straightforward.

I did the implementation of Sophos XG myself and it took approximately 20 minutes.

There is no maintenance is required for this solution.

Our networking team is approximately 10 people that use the solution.

The Palo Alto solution is expensive and the FortiGate is less expensive than Palo Alto. The Sophos XG would be priced in the middle of the two.

There are some fees but you can purchase a bundle package.

My advice to those wanting to use this solution is if you don't have experience, don't use it.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Sophos XG a seven out of ten.

We use this solution for VPN, client VPN, malware filtering, and antivirus scanning.

It has definitely improved the way our organization functions. Previously only using free tools, and once we started using Sophos XG, the number of threats dropped dramatically. We had a lot of threats to our network, but they have dramatically decreased since we started using this solution.

All of the features in Sophos XG are valuable.

Web publishing is important, as well as the importance of the antivirus patch. 

The firewall is also essential, and the VPN.

Our clients use Karios, and while it integrates well with it, the integration could be improved.

I have been using Sophos XG for three years.

We are using the XG version.

We encountered an issue with the hardware when we first purchased this solution. We called Sophos, who replaced the device, and we have not had any issues since.

We have no issues with the scalability of Sophos XG.

In our organization, we have 150 users, and all are required to maintain this solution.

We don't have plans to increase the usage at this time.

We have not really used technical support. If we have an issue, we resolve it ourselves.

Previously, we were using older versions of Microsoft. We used it for almost 10 years before switching to Sophos.

The initial setup was easy.

We completed the installation ourselves. I took a maximum of two weeks.

I have not calculated our ROI.

We have a three-year license.

I am the Chief IT Officer. I don't have all of the technical details of this product. We have technical staff who use this solution for their daily routines and activities.

It's a very good product. I would rate Sophos XG an eight out of ten.

This solution is used by both us and our customers.

As this product has recently changed, we are learning about the features of Sophos XG one step at a time.

Sophos began with a basic version and evolved into something more efficient in terms of performance.

It integrates well with other Sophos products, such as the Sophos Firewall, Sophos Endpoint, and other features in a cloud platform, to help the customer better manage security on their site.

I would like to have a more efficient logging process & real time analisys. The logging, expecially with EDR subscription, is something that needs improvement.

I would like to see email management improved to have more features and options for integrating with other solutions, expecially cloud based.

We started working with Sophos XG when it was known as Astaro AG. I have been working with this solution for more than 10 years.

Technical support is always an issue, not just with Sophos but also with other brands. It is extremely difficult to interact with support within the time frame that the customer expects.

In general, it takes more time to solve a problem, and better independent actions are required.

The initial setup can be difficult. You should be familiar with Sophos or have prior knowledge of it, as it requires concepts from older versions of Sophos, the Sophos SG, the Cyberoam environment, and everything that has recently been introduced.

It is better to have some training before using this solution.

The price is reasonable in my opinion.

I began looking into Fortinet solutions simply to compare some features.

I would always recommend conducting a thorough analysis before deciding on a solution because Sophos may have some oversight for some of the tasks. It is beneficial to examine the environment that the Sophos product will be used, considering the integration with other features.

I would rate Sophos XG an eight out of ten.

The solution is mostly a good firewall. 

The initial setup is pretty easy compared to other options on the market.

The product has been stable.

The solution can scale. 

Technical support is responsive. 

Sophos offers pretty good pricing.

The user interface could be better.

We find that the solution takes too long to load. It's slow. 

We've been dealing with the product for six or seven years at this point. It's been a while. 

The solution has been stable. We haven't had any bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We have customers of every size, including medium and enterprise-level.

The product can scale and if a company needs to expand it can do so.

Technical support is pretty good. We've been happy with their level of responsiveness. I have no complaints. 

The initial setup isn't too difficult or complex. It's pretty straightforward. 

We find the pricing to be reasonable and not overly expensive. 

We are a Sophos reseller. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. If the graphical user interface was better and the performance was stronger, I would rate it higher.