Sophos Firewall Reviews

I use Sophos XGS for networking purposes, particularly for wireless LAN and security. It is used as a firewall.

Sophos XGS is cost effective and provides all necessary security features and throughput. It includes internal control policy and security features comparable to other brands like Cisco but at a more affordable price.

The user interface has improved significantly over the past few years, and having a more competitive price model could make it a preferable choice for customers. It would be beneficial if Sophos XGS offered an end-to-end solution with competitive pricing.

I have been using Sophos products for more than four years, specifically using the XGS product for about two years.

I have no issues with the stability of the product and love using it.

Scalability is possible with Sophos XGS, and I would rate it an eight out of ten for scalability.

Technical support from Sophos is always available and not a challenge.

For technical people like me and my team, setting up Sophos XGS is not difficult. The setup process is manageable for those who know the basics and core of the technology.

If the pricing model is more flexible or lower, it would be highly preferable, making it a more competitive option for users.

Palo Alto and Fortinet are some of the competitors. However, Sophos is preferred due to its cost-effectiveness and comprehensive feature set.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Sophos XGS is deployed as a gateway firewall with VPN in our network environment, excluding the web server feature and the email filtration feature.

Sophos XGS has been helping us manage the threats specific to our industry, although we have yet to fully utilize its AI capabilities. Its deployment has been pretty good, enhancing the clarity of filtration systems and reducing security costs.

The only filtration works quite nicely. Sophos XGS has been really better, providing clearer filtrations than its predecessor. It is extremely easy to deploy and fast to learn.

The interface is really showing up on the edge now. It needs to be more modern and faster, with more rules visible on a single screen for better details rather than just six rules. The threat detection system could be more GUI-based or provide templates for common threats. We also need more updated version 20 study materials.

We have been using Sophos XGS for close to one year. We started shifting from XG to XGS almost a year ago, and now all our systems have been changed to XGS. XG was used for the previous six years.

Sophos XGS has worked well in terms of stability, with no significant issues reported.

The customer service and support from Sophos have been quite good, with timely and effective responses. Although we rarely need support, when required, it has been prompt.

Positive

We previously worked with SonicWall but switched to Sophos because it was found to be pretty fast. We also briefly considered Palo Alto, which offered great machine and filter systems but had concerns with the support in India at that time.

The initial setup was straightforward and not problematic, as we could deploy it by ourselves without needing external support.

We usually go for three-year subscriptions. For the data center, we deployed units in dual mode and failover mode, which involved significant costs estimated at six lakh rupees.

We evaluated Palo Alto but ultimately chose Sophos due to concerns about Palo Alto's support in India. However, Palo Alto XGS has improved in terms of security and support.

The antivirus aspect of Sophos needs improvement as the current solutions don't complete the job adequately in today's market. There should be templates to address repeated attack modes, saving time instead of relying heavily on detailed engineer setups.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our main use case at the moment for Sophos XG is to create a site-to-site VPN with one of our clients. We cannot use AWS VPN, so we use Sophos XG.

We only used the VPN functionality. We did not explore other aspects of the product beyond the VPN capabilities.

The IPsec VPN is the only feature we utilized in Sophos XG. We did not explore the web and application filtering capabilities, and these features have not helped our organization in managing bandwidth or access to malicious sites.

The user-friendly interface of Sophos XG is acceptable but too complicated. There are many options and configurations, but it is very complicated to navigate through all those options if you are not familiar with the product.

Sophos XG can be improved by making the UI more user-friendly. They should add packet capture functionality in the UI instead of requiring users to access the server directly for this purpose, as it is a very useful tool that everyone needs. Additionally, it can be confusing when working in the AWS Marketplace, as users might mistakenly purchase the old version of Sophos XG.

I have been using Sophos XG for three or four months. It is new, and we may discontinue using this product because it has not met our requirements.

Considering the deployment flexibility of the Sophos XG firewall, hybrid deployments have not supported our organization's diverse technological infrastructure.

It is a bit early to tell, but Sophos XG is adequate for my company's growing needs at present.

I have not tried their customer service and technical support.

Positive

I have considered other solutions before Sophos XG, including pfSense, AWS firewall, and Kato firewall.

I was previously using AWS firewall and Kato firewall before switching to Sophos XG.

My experience with deploying Sophos XG was easy.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing was through AWS.

I do not use the security heartbeat functionality.

I have not tried the synchronized security feature of the Sophos XG firewall.

I am not particularly interested in being a reference to the vendor. We do not use Sophos extensively, so I may not provide substantial insights.

What led me to consider changing was that we thought the VPN configuration was not working because of the product we used to work with, so we tried other alternatives.

On a scale of 1-10, I would rate Sophos XG a seven or eight, though this rating is limited by our minimal usage of the product.

Positive

Our primary use case is focused on renewing outdated firewalls and providing VPN capabilities without additional licensing costs.

The firewall helped by providing VPN licensing for free, unlike other vendors that charge for VPN.

The application filtering, especially cloud filtering, is valuable. It's able to detect cloud applications like Zoom or Microsoft Teams and allows traffic shaping based on the application.

VPN setup could be improved. Fixing some bugs would also be beneficial.

I have been working with Sophos XGS firewall for approximately two years and one month.

The solution is very stable as long as there's no power outage or similar interruption.

The firewall is quite scalable. I would rate its scalability seven out of ten since modules can be added.

Customer support is generally good. There may be delays with standard support due to inexperienced first-level support. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup for the XGS firewall can be rated as seven out of ten due to VPN setup challenges.

Sophos XGS is quite expensive, potentially a nine out of ten in terms of cost, making it much pricier than other firewalls.

I recommend it for its user-friendly interface. Even novice users can catch up quickly without confusion.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The primary use case for Sophos XG is basic firewalling and configuration. We use it primarily for installation purposes.

Time-saving and cost-saving benefits are realized, with stability contributing to these advantages. It provides approximately 10% to 15% savings in time and costs.

The most valuable features of Sophos XG include having rules and policies as a firewall. It is easy to configure.

The areas needing improvement are support and configuration. The delays in technical support can be handled better. Sometimes, configuration gives some issues.

I have been using Sophos XG for almost one year.

No hardware or software solution is 100% stable. I would rate it at about 99% accuracy.

Sophos XG has excellent scalability features. It is already available on cloud as well as on-premises, and you can scale up to multiple firewalls with centralized management. No limitations have been faced regarding scalability.

Customer service and support can be improved as there are delays. I would rate the support at eight out of ten.

Positive

Sophos XG is easy to install, generally requiring one person and takes about two to three hours depending on the rules and policies.

One person is usually sufficient for installation unless multiple dynamics are involved.

The return on investment is judged to be around three point five out of five in terms of stability, time saving, and cost saving.

The solution is considered cheap in terms of pricing.

For small and midsize enterprises, Sophos XG is a good choice without any major issues.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I am a customer and end-user support using Sophos XGS.

Sophos XGS has provided good efficiency and good sharing.

I find DLP, API, IP, SDK, and web control to be valuable features. I also like the dynamic roles, application visibility, and policy test.

All the security features could be better.

I have used Sophos XGS for one year.

The solution has high stability, rated ten out of ten.

The solution is highly scalable, rated ten out of ten.

I rate the customer service and support as ten out of ten.

Positive

Before Sophos XGS, I used a CyberPro product, however, it was outdated and did not provide sufficient support.

The initial setup was easy, and the documentation was very well-written.

The deployment was done in-house by three to four people.

The pricing of Sophos XGS is not very high or very low; it's medium.

I recommend Sophos XGS because it is easy to use, more secure, and scalable.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We are using Sophos XGS in our organization primarily because it integrates well with Software Central and is good for smaller teams. It requires fewer people to monitor it.

Sophos XGS helps us with diagnosing issues, giving us a breakdown of what the data is actually saying. It has centralized our operations by integrating everything into Software Central.

The most valuable features of Sophos XGS are its integration into Software Central and its threat intelligence capability. Everything integrates into Software Central, making operations very seamless. 

The threat intelligence capability works well; we recently had a penetration test that showed it is performing well. Also, the AI capabilities help us diagnose potential issues and provide a breakdown of what the data is communicating.

A feature that could be improved in Sophos XGS is the ability to perform internal vulnerability checks. This would provide more comprehensive security by checking both external and internal vulnerabilities on the same appliance.

We have been working with Sophos XGS for just over a year.

Sophos XGS is very stable. We only had a couple of minor issues, which were resolved very quickly.

Sophos XGS's scalability is excellent; I would rate it a ten. Adding other sites took very little time and did not cause significant issues.

We are very satisfied with the customer service and support. I would rate the support from Sophos XGS a ten out of ten.

Positive

We used to use a WatchGuard firewall before switching to Sophos. We switched because Sophos offers a centralized platform that integrates everything we need.

The initial setup was handled by a third party, and the handover was very straightforward. Overall, it was straightforward when we got into it.

The implementation was carried out by a third party. The process was smooth and straightforward.

Sophos XGS has done its job effectively so far. We are very satisfied with its performance and ability to meet our security needs.

We paid around 17,000 pounds for a three-year package. The cost is reasonable and comparable to our previous solution.

Before Sophos, we were using WatchGuard, but we switched to Sophos for better integration and centralized management.

I highly recommend Sophos XGS to those considering using it, especially small teams. It's easy to use and integrates all Sophos products, such as endpoints, into one central portal.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We can recommend Sophos XGS for industrial software companies, small businesses at the entry-level, as well as enterprise companies. We offer it for a range of customers, from entry-level to high-end.

The reporting in XGS is a major benefit for us. In other platforms, we can't get reports for one or two months. Secondly, it's very easy to handle and understand, and the deployment process helps enhance our skill set. 

The integration with Azure SSO and IPsec is also great. I like the remote access feature, and I would like to see IPS included as well, where we get more detailed reports and can identify and block issues from a single source.

There are a lot more features I haven't explored yet. We just implemented it based on our colleagues' recommendations and are currently working through the support checklist.

Migration and support processes are improving. Even people new to Sophos are finding it easier to manage now.

A lot of training is required. When I train our engineers, they aren’t able to get sufficient training from Sophos-hosted sessions. We only find textbooks and some videos on Sophos portal. 

More live sessions or time-bound training would help us understand how to pitch the firewall or use specific features, like advanced photo settings or integration with SD-WAN. 

We need to know which feature is suited to different environments. Right now, that knowledge gap makes us more dependent on OEM support, which could be reduced by up to 40% if more training was available.

For me, reporting is a major area for improvement. Detailed reports help pinpoint issues like usage bottlenecks or abnormal activities, allowing us to fine-tune the firewall. IPS in XGS is great because it provides timely attack reports we can present to management. Integration with Active Directory could also be better. Sophos Central integration is good, but the firewall’s performance is slow when accessed through Sophos Central. Our clients also experience slow access when using their credentials. That’s a bottleneck I’d like to see resolved.

I have been using it for the last three years.  

The customer service and support have been very good. It's much better now than it was a year ago. Back then, responses were slower, but now their technical support is good. However, RMAs (Return Merchandise Authorization) can still take a while. For instance, recently it took two days to analyze a faulty box. 

Maybe it was due to the weekend, but after I raised the request on a Friday, the replacement box only arrived by Thursday. This caused a delay, and we didn't have any alternatives for providing Internet services to our clients during that period. It takes longer with XGS devices. So, I would deduct points for the delays in RMA and pricing.

Positive

Along with XGS, we push antivirus with laptop encryption, and also Sophos Intercept X for endpoint protection. We push all these products, along with the red devices (hardware appliances).

We're not pushing Sophos MDR because of the pricing. Clients aren't accepting it because competitors offer lower prices, and clients don't fully understand the additional features of MDR. 

For endpoint protection, I only push Sophos antivirus with all the compliance features, like web filtering, data encryption for laptops, and protection for remote users. For MDR, we focus on larger companies.

We deal with corporate offices. For those types of clients, we push for MDR/XDR. However, they are also checking out other features and platforms because we've had some large opportunities. 

Compared to other products [like Fortigate, SonicWall and Palo Alto], Sophos's pricing is a little higher. 

The second thing is that support is very good, but we're having more issues getting pricing for the Sophos device on time from our vendors. Whenever we request pricing, we simply drop an email. 

We create comparison sheets for Sophos XGS when pitching to our clients. We highlight the benchmarks and advanced features, like reporting, that aren't available in other products. We emphasize the value of the bundle that comes with the firewall role. This is a major factor in convincing clients to choose Sophos XGS. The reporting capabilities and overall features are good.

I would recommend using Sophos. We push Sophos to most of our clients. Almost 99% of them use it. Only a few clients prefer FortiGate due to company policies, and some use Check Point, but we mostly recommend Sophos XGS.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

When compared to older versions, after the 2021 update, there have been significant improvements. Routing has become easier, and integration with third-party platforms like Azure and IPsec is seamless. Creating policies for different VLAN compliance requirements is also simpler, and the flexibility now is much better than earlier versions.

I was a distributor for Sophos XG products and worked with customers seeking network security solutions. In my current company, we previously used Sophos XG products extensively before switching to other options.

Sophos XG offers a robust solution with quota management features that are per IP and per user, which I find to be very effective. The ability to manage everything in one box is a significant advantage, eliminating the need to purchase separate products for email security and other features. The user interface is user-friendly, offering dashboards with widgets that provide speed and status, making configuration easy. Traffic management is facilitated through various configurations and user self-portals. Additionally, Sophos XG makes administrative tasks seamless by allowing easy navigation and configuration.

The technical support could be improved, particularly in terms of response speed, as there were delays when working with their Indian support team.

Traffic management is facilitated through various configurations.

Sophos XG is primarily suitable for SMB and mid-level enterprise categories, but not typically chosen by high-end enterprises in Sri Lanka.

The technical support could be improved, particularly regarding response speed when working with the Indian team.

Neutral

Previously, we used Sophos UTM before transitioning to Sophos XG.

The implementation of Sophos XG is straightforward and easy.

I worked as a distributor and the setup was handled internally or with assistance from vendors.

During my research, I explored products like Fortinet FortiGate and Netgate pfSense.

I rate Sophos XG eight out of ten. While the implementation was straightforward and easy, the technical support could use improvement. I recommend looking into improving the features and security validations to cater to the needs of bigger companies.