Sophos Firewall Reviews

We use Sophos XG for network threat protection in our data center.

The solution has good performance and is easy to use.

The solution could be more secure.

I have been using Sophos XG for a few years.

The solution is stable.

We have approximately 100 users using this solution.

The installation of Sophos XG is easy.

 We have four technical engineers for installation and administrators for this equipment.

We have evaluated Palo Alto and FortiGate.

We have replaced some of our hardware with Palo Alto and FortiGate solutions.

I am satisfied with this solution.

I rate Sophos XG an eight out of ten.

There are about 100 people using Sophos at our office. We have two ISPs, so we have to have access to our internet providers. We also need security to deploy our network. Also, our home and external users need to be able to log in. So we use Sophos XG to build our deployment. Sophos is more than just a firewall. It analyzes security effects, so it's a firewall for the future. It's more than just a hardware firewall. There are also some paid options, so we do not have to have the main server inside our office here. We use Office 365. And although we use five servers at our location, not everything is in the cloud yet. 

We haven't used it for very long, so I have not analyzed the main features deeply. So far, I'm happy that they have recently added a firewall role, so I feel a little more comfortable with the security. The threat management is good. Also, the graphics and the throughput of our internet access are better than before, so it's the Sophos anti-threat device that we have. 

For the moment, managing the Sophos interface is a little bit challenging. We have an external partner that helps me to comprehend. But it's new. It has to keep up with the market, and I understand that. But that's my personal problem at the moment. High-availability clusters have not been implemented, so we have only one firewall and one device. So should this device go down, there's no more internet access. But so far, we haven't had any problems. 

I've only been using Sophos XG for three months.

Sophos is stable.

Sophos XG is scalable.

I used Sophos tech support for the previous solution because Sophos sold that as well. Now, we only work with the external partners. So for the moment, I haven't had to send questions directly to Sophos. But my past experience with Sophos support was good. It was very professional and easy. We stay with Sophos software because of the technical support.

We had Cyberoam. That brand that doesn't exist anymore, so we had to change.

I contacted the external partner, and the setup was easy. It took about two or three days. Some little pictures were difficult for us to find, but that's normal. We could not make a one-to-one copy of the older one, so we had to search for some little personal configurations here. Now that everything is configured right, we are happy to have it. 

Because Sophos is sold by the brand that we had before that and Cyberoam does not exist anymore, it costs less because we stayed within the older firewalls. The price was also very good. It was not expensive before because of their value at the time. I think it's not cheap but not very expensive, either. It's in the middle. 

Based on what I know from using it so far, I would recommend Sophos. I rate it eight out of 10.

The solution is very slow in comparison with SonicWall and FortiGate. It should have faster performance. 

The installation could be faster and is longer than that of other solutions, lasting more than a month instead of five minutes.  

I've been using Sophos XG for five years.

When compared with other firewalls, such as that of SonicWall, we have had no issues with the solution's stability. It works very well.

The solution is scalable.

Sophos does not provide immediate support, such as SonicWall does with its toll free number. This may take an hour or two, although I suppose things would be different were we to raise a critical ticket. 

I have been in contact with tech support within the last week or so. 

SonicWall has a toll-free number which can be reached for immediate support, something which is unique, although Sophos may take an hour or two to respond. I suppose this would be different were a person to raise a critical ticket. 

Sophos XG has a longer installation period than other firewalls, occupying in excess of a month instead of five minutes. 

I am the technical person. Installation can be handled independently. We do the configuration of the firewall. 

We have two teams that are responsible for the deployment, a firewall and a network one. We can handle the implementation using both teams. 

I don't believe we have a license for this product.

SonicWall and FortiGate provide considerably faster performance than Sophos. 

The solution is deployed both on-premises and on the cloud. 

We have a data center which contains multiple firewalls. If our clients ask about a certain firewall expert, we simply implement the Sophos firewall, clientele. We have created certain IP sectors like this, in which case we provide multiple firewalls in clientele.

We have around 150 clients making use of the firewall.

We would recommend the solution to others. 

I rate Sophos XG as a ten out of ten. 

It's primarily for on-premise firewall functionality and functionality of internet lines.

The appeal to our IT team is that this is an easy to deploy, user friendly, and easy to work with solution that includes antivirus software.

I'd like to see a more simplified functionality for our customers. We also had a negative experience with the sales team of Sophos, which offered a three-year renewal to our customer. We'd suggested one year, keeping the customer's cashflow in mind and Covid. The result was that it affected our credibility with the customer. These are some of the irritants in the sales policy.  

I've been using this solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

We have deployed it for 100 users to date, so it's quite scalable. We mainly work with small and medium size organizations. 

The implementation is straightforward. It depends on your environment, and the number of users as well as the complex rules you're making. That aside, it is easy to deploy.

I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

Our customers use Sophos XG as a firewall.

The solution could improve by making the graphical interface better and increasing the performance. 

I have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

The scalability of Sophos XG is good.

Most of our customers are small to middle-sized businesses.

The support we have received from the partner has been good.

We use Sophos XG, Fortinet, and Palo Alto solutions.

The installation is easy. There is a wizard that can be used for a single connection making it simple and if you have multiple connections you can configure it manually.

Sophos tends to have less performance compared to Fortinet, and Palo Alto solutions.

I rate Sophos XG a six out of ten.

We are using the solution internally for policy purposes in our data center. We use the firewall for certain routes for client connectivity. 

I like the functionality and the user interface. The solution has a better graphic interface than that of Cisco. 

I wish to see an antivirus feature added to the solution. 

I believe we have been using Sophos XG for more than three years. 

The solution has better stability than Cisco, which is why I prefer it over other firewalls. 

I have not had need for technical support. Mostly, I find what I am looking for on the internet. 

The initial setup is easy.

I handled the implementation by myself.

The solution is not expensive since one pays as he goes. He pays just for the functionality he requires, meaning there is no need to pay for all that Sophos offers. If a person needs email protection, he will pay just for this. The same holds true if he needs web filtering. 

The solution is more stable than Cisco, which is why I like it better than the other firewalls.

The firewall does not connect to the internet. It is not firewall edge. We use the solution as a data center firewall. 

I would recommend the solution because it provides the greatest firewall protection. 

I rate Sophos XG as a seven out of ten. 

The solution is a next generation firewall and we have gotten good customer feedback. It is a very good appliance. The daily, up-to-date security features of the solution's updates and device answer customer IT needs concerning security, network and web protection and new protections, such as those concerning data. 

The box needs to be fixed

Moreover,the bugs need fixing. I also think that SD-WAN features should be added. The intelligence feature should be improved and Sophos needs upgrading and updating. 

I've been using Sophos XG since 2015.

The solution is stable. 

Both Sophos XG and XGS offer a host of cloud-based security features. 

The solution is very scalable. 

Our IT-related infrastructure allows us to scale up. This is a good feature of SD-WAN, which affords easy scalability to modern networks and many data center advances. The SD-WAN features are the most important part of Sophos XG's scalability. When it comes to the scanning power requirements, we have the ability to scale over it. 

While the solution proved to be user-friendly and to offer an easy deployment we faced many issues involving its registration. This posed an issue when it came to scaling. However, we found it to be easy to configure and implement. 

The solution is more cost-effective than FortiGate, Cisco and Palo Alto, which have very expensive licenses.

The solution is very user-friendly. 

I would recommend the solution to my customers because it costs a fraction of its previous price and most of them cannot afford an expensive EDR backup.

We generally deploy this solution for our clients for its basic functionality; our clients generally don't have sophisticated requirements. The solution is used for the firewall rules and the VPN rules, as well as the WAF functionality. We are silver resellers of this product and I'm head of the software department. 

The most useful aspect of the solution is the concept of integrated security which is why I use and recommended this firewall to clients. However, given that we never use endpoint protection, there is less incentive for us to continue using it. Initially it provided a specificity which enabled one kind of endpoint protection managed through the appliance together with the WIFI integrated within the firewall, managing all basic security aspects for TPD. However, because the endpoint protection is not that good and there are problems with malware and we can't prioritize facility management over security of the finances, we can't continue to work this way.

I think the management console could be improved. I also find the partner portal difficult to work with because it never functions correctly and it's exhausting to deal with. They should also improve the failover management and the reliability of failover, and there are sometimes issues with the WAF functionality, whereby a number of applications can't be used correctly. Finally, I think the support could be improved because when you open a ticket, there's a long wait time for a response. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The stability is quite good there are no major vulnerabilities. 

The technical support is a real weakness but that seems to always be the case. Sophos has improved over the last couple of years. It's better than before but it's still not good.  

I find the solution too expensive, to be honest. It's one of the reasons I'm looking for an alternative. It's overpriced for what they offer.  When you buy a commercial appliance, the only thing you really need is good support, and they don't provide that, so the cost for hardware and software is too expensive. If the support was responsive, I'd be happy to pay. Now I'd prefer to acquire my own hardware and install pfSense and spend the money helping technicians and engineers gain good skills and improve our own support. We'd have the same level of protection at a lower cost. 

I rate this solution a seven out of 10.