Sophos Firewall Reviews

Actually, we are using Tekton for creating CI/CD pipelines for building and deploying applications to different environments.

It helped a lot in terms of automation. We sometimes use Tekton for purposes like sending emails, running batch jobs, and similar tasks.

The valuable features include cloud-native integration, which makes it highly available and efficient in modern containerized environments. Another feature is the modular pipeline that allows reusing CI/CD manifests for different purposes. This modularity helps in reducing redundancy and maintaining a streamlined process.

One area of improvement is the lack of cross-cluster capability, meaning you need different sets of tasks and pipelines for each Kubernetes cluster. Tekton also has an unstable API with frequent changes, making it challenging to maintain consistency across versions. Additionally, there's a need for a better dashboard and built-in authentication mechanisms.

It's about one and a half years we have been working with Tekton.

Tekton is quite stable when used in a well-established Kubernetes cluster. The stability largely depends on the stability of the Kubernetes environment itself, which is designed for high availability.

Tekton's scalability is one of its most advanced features. Since it uses the underlying Kubernetes infrastructure, it can scale easily if the Kubernetes cluster is sufficiently large. I would rate it eight out of ten for scalability.

We primarily used community resources like Stack Overflow for addressing our issues and did not directly contact Tekton's customer service.

In my previous company, we used GitLab and Jenkins for creating CICD pipelines. Currently, Tekton is the primary tool we are using, with Jenkins as a backup solution if Tekton encounters any issues.

The initial setup was manageable but required extensive reading and understanding of documentation. If the Kubernetes cluster is already in place, the setup can be completed in less than ten minutes.

The deployment of Tekton was done in-house with a team of six to seven people handling deployment, creating CI/CD pipelines, and maintaining the solution.

Tekton is an open-source tool, meaning there are no setup costs associated with it. I would rate the cost at one, indicating it is free to use.

In my previous company, we used GitLab and Jenkins for similar purposes.

My advice is to avoid using Tekton if possible due to its complex setup and lack of user-friendly features like a comprehensive dashboard and built-in authentication mechanisms.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

On-premises

I am using this product for security purposes.

Sophos XG is user-friendly, easily configured, and has all the latest features, including URL filtering.

I have used the Synchronized Security feature of Sophos XG along with the Heartbeat functionality, specifically the Security Heartbeat.

The filtering capabilities of Sophos XG are good and I find it user-friendly.

An area that could be improved is technical support's ticket registration process. Sometimes when I contact technical support, they do not register the tickets properly. They ask about registered mail ID and registration number when I am already under pressure. For instance, when the internet is not working or when I cannot apply certain rules, I am already stressed, but the tech support did not register the calls. This happened three to four months ago.

I have been using Sophos XG for one year.

Installing Sophos XG is very easy, with no issues encountered.

The complete installation, including setting up all rules, takes approximately one and a half hours.

I am familiar with Sophos XG.

We have purchased Sophos XG directly through Sophos, though I am not aware of the financial operations regarding the purchase.

I rate the technical support as eight out of ten.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Sophos XG as eight.

On-premises

Other

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

We use Sophos XGS firewall for edge control.

The solution's most valuable features are IPS, IDS, and web application security.

Sophos XGS should improve its customer service and educate its implementation partner. It should also work on building relationships with customers directly because there is no Sophos office or person to handle the Pakistan region. If Sophos opens its local office, its business will increase. Sophos XGS should train the technical staff about new challenges in security.

I have been using Sophos XGS for almost three years.

Sophos XGS is a stable solution.

At our data center head office, we have two high-availability devices. On the remote side, we are using a single piece of equipment. All these are XGS 2000, 126, and 200 series. So, we have already chosen a scalable solution. Around 700 users are using the solution in our organization.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward. It took hardly one hour to deploy the solution.

We have outsourced the solution's deployment to a service provider or implementation partner. A team of professionals went on-site and installed it, and the configuration will be done through our remote support.

We signed a three-year support contract with the implementation partner when we purchased the hardware. Now, they are providing support, but it is not good. We have lodged an official complaint against the implementation partner because they sometimes refuse to provide support.

Initially, we were going with another partner, but the distributor recommended Information Systems Associates Pvt Ltd to us. So, I have also lodged an official complaint against the distributor.

Sophos XGS is a very expensive solution. It cost us $ 33,000. Huawei and Sangfor make much cheaper firewalls available in Pakistan. The equipment is being sold at throwaway prices. If we compare the market prices, the acquisition cost of Sophos XGS is much higher than that of the other market competitors. However, Sophos XGS is cheaper than Palo Alto.

Its competitor, Sangfor, provides an add-on EDR feature with the same firewall. Each and every node is connected with the firewall through EDR because all traffic is monitored. This functionality is not available in Sophos.

The solution provides threat intelligence capabilities, but some other tools are much better than Sophos XGS. I would recommend the solution to other users.

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

On-premises

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

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

People use Sophos XGS because the overall channel support is very good, so they don't face issues. Additionally, it is competitive in pricing against Fortinet in some cases, especially when considering high availability, email subscriptions, and gateways.

Sophos XGS has provided stability, security, and ease of management. It also offers better reporting options.

Sophos XGS has very good reporting capabilities and effective IPS signatures based on the latest versions. The threat detection capabilities are effective, especially against CNC and certain viruses not coming through emails.

In previous versions, NAT rules were easier to create. After version 18.5, creating a NAT rule has become more complex, requiring the creation of a separate policy and an additional component. 

Reducing the complexity of creating rules would make it easier for administrators, especially when troubleshooting and managing.

I have been working with Sophos XGS since it was released, approximately for the last three years. Additionally, I have been working with Sophos for six to seven years.

The stability of Sophos XGS is very high. It is rated at nine out of ten for stability and is very reliable.

The scalability of Sophos XGS is rated eight out of ten.

The response time from Sophos technical support can be slow in most cases, which can be challenging. However, in some cases, they perform well.

Neutral

The initial setup is very straightforward, simple, and easy to understand. It clearly defines outgoing policies, sources, and destinations while applying web controls or IPS rules.

On the pricing side, pricing is rated eight out of ten, indicating that it may be relatively expensive.

Based on my experience, I would definitely recommend Sophos XGS to others.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

On-premises