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.

Hybrid Cloud

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.

The product has improved our network security posture. We got some phishing and malware attacks. We found out that someone was attacking our network. Since we installed the solution, we are not facing any attacks.

IPS works smoothly. The policies and rules work fine. The network performance and reporting tools of Sophos XG are good.

We are facing a little bit of an issue with the product's web filtering capabilities. It must be improved. SD-WAN can be improved.

I have been using the solution for almost two years.

I rate the tool’s stability a seven or eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven or eight out of ten. Almost 5000 people are using the solution in our organization. We have installed the firewall. It is always running.

The support takes a lot of time to resolve issues.

Neutral

I rate the ease of setup a seven out of ten. The deployment took a few weeks.

The deployment was done in-house. We needed two to three people for the deployment.

I rate the pricing a seven or eight out of ten.

I will recommend the product to others. The solution is not extremely good, but it is good. Overall, I rate the product a seven or eight out of ten.

On-premises

We mostly deploy Sophos XG to our customers because we are an IT system integrator. Our primary use case involves working with small to medium businesses to control internet usage, perform web filtering, application control, and manage bandwidth.

Sophos XG is popular among small to medium businesses, allowing them to control internet usage, perform web filtering, application control, and manage bandwidth. Additionally, AI assists in configuration, offering clues when users are stuck, which enhances user convenience and efficiency.

There is interest in seeing more features related to AI and customization in future releases.

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

The installation process is straightforward and easy due to the training we receive. In new site setups, it's quick, but migrating from one vendor to another requires more planning and can take a couple of days.

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

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

Customer service and support for Sophos XG is excellent, and I would rate it as a ten.

Positive

I worked with other vendors like Cisco, Palo Alto, and Microsoft long ago.

The initial setup varies by scenario: it's quick for new sites, but it takes longer for vendor migrations due to the need for seamless planning.

I have a dedicated team of five engineers who handle installations.

There are cost savings compared to competitors, providing more financial benefits.

Sophos XG offers good pricing compared to competitors. While there are extra expenses for additional features, overall licensing costs are well-regarded.

I would rate Sophos XG as a nine out of ten. The cost savings make it suitable for small to medium businesses with 50 to 300 users. Overall, I am very satisfied with the product.

On-premises

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.

On-premises

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.

On-premises

My clients use Sophos XG for deploying firewalls at corporate office and branch offices. The branches connect via site-to-site VPN, allowing outbound traffic from the central location.

The firewall provides network visibility and reporting capabilities, constantly improving over time. It can be integrated with the cloud console, allowing centralized management of multiple firewalls. integration with endpoint security products ensures seamless traffic flow and rule enforcement, even when endpoints are not directly connected to the firewall.   

I've had experience with Sophos XG's threat intelligence features, and they provide good coverage, although I wouldn't say they're the best in the industry. The sandbox feature is available with top-tier subscriptions, allowing you to test content in a cloud sandbox.

One improvement I'd suggest for Sophos XG is to make certain functionalities, like CR functionality, part of the default firewalling rather than exclusive to premium subscriptions. Enhancing DLP capabilities at the gateway level could significantly boost security for organizations.

I have been using Sophos XG for the past 10 years. 

As for stability, I'd give it a high score, maybe a nine, because it keeps running without much downtime.

I'd rate them an eight for stablity It's not to say they're perfect, but generally, it's pretty good I'd recommend it for companies of all sizes.

Integrating Sophos XG into existing infrastructure was quite easy and straightforward. There were hardly any complexities involved in the process.you can use both options - cloud-based or hardware-based firewalls. When I mention hybrid, it means having both options available. While cloud-based firewalls offer convenience, they can be more expensive compared to hardware ones. Although I haven't personally worked with the cloud version, it seems similar in appearance but may have different features. Cloud-based firewalls may seem like an overkill in terms of price, especially when considering the cost of operation over time. They become more beneficial when additional security layers like zero trust, DLP, or secure web gateway functionalities are added. This expands security beyond physical location constraints, making it accessible from anywhere.

I'd rate Sophos XG an 8. It's my first preference and confidently recommend it to other users.

Mainly as a firewall, and in some cases, as a firewall with camera surveillance integration. But primarily, it is used for firewall functionality.

I find the firewall functionality and unified threat management to be the most useful features.

The VPN has been a persistent problem for us. It's not straightforward to configure. We often encounter issues with setting up the VPN. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and we haven't been able to determine the cause.

So the VPN configuration could be less cryptic. It should be easier and more straightforward to configure. A simplified installation process and clearer instructions would be helpful. The current VPN configuration is a bit convoluted.

In additional features, it would be beneficial if Sophos XG could have an enhanced feature for aggregating bandwidth. Currently, it supports load balancing to some extent, but it would be even better if it could aggregate the bandwidth. For example, if I have multiple links, say two or three, it would be great if the solution could aggregate the bandwidth from those links. 

Ever since Sophos acquired Cyberoam. I used to use Cyberoam, and then Sophos took over Cyberoam. So I would say it's been about five to seven years since that transition happened. 

I have various versions because I'm a network service provider. I offer the high-end enterprise edition as well as the mid-range and basic versions. There are several different models available.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It is very stable. 

When deploying on-premises, if you need to scale, you have to purchase additional hardware. So, on-premises scalability would be around six out of ten. You have to size the solution for future needs.

The cloud version is much more scalable. However, when it comes to on-premises deployments, scaling can be challenging. If you need to upgrade to a higher level, you have to acquire another hardware box. So, it's not as straightforward as cloud scalability, but it's still possible, though not as easy. 

There are about 200 users. They are small and medium businesses. 

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. It required some experience in designing networks. It's not a simple "click-click-click" process; it requires the expertise of a network professional. So, if you're not experienced, it can be challenging.

It can be difficult for inexperienced users, but with the right knowledge and experience, it is manageable.

The deployment process involved acquiring the device, planning the network design, configuring it according to the desired network setup, and then connecting the necessary cables. It's a relatively straightforward process.

It only took an hour to deploy the solution.

It is fairly priced. I would rate it an eight out of ten. Mostly, I only purchase the standard license because I don't usually require the other features. It would cost approximately $2,000 on an annual basis.

Overall, my experience has been positive. I haven't encountered any major issues with it. It's easy to use and not cryptic. It's also quite stable, and I rarely experience any hangs or similar problems.

I would rate this product an eight out of ten because there is still room for improvement in VPN. 

On-premises