Sophos Firewall Reviews

We are using it as a firewall to protect and control Internet access, as well as control other access like SAP. Some of our employees connect from remote locations, and our server is on-premises. We use this firewall for access control and also for VPN connections.

It's easy to use, and the service is good. If anything goes wrong, their support system is very reliable.

The renewal process for this box is too frequent. We purchased it five years ago, and it's expiring in 2025. So, I feel they expire it too quickly.

In future releases, this solution could have more graphical elements on the dashboard to make it easier to understand. While there are graphics and a good dashboard, there's always room for improvement.

We have been using Sophos XGS for ten years. At that time, it was new. So somebody recommended us to take this. Our service provider recommended it, and that's why we have taken it.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. We have around 300 end users in our organization. 

The customer service and support has been excellent. 

We have worked with Cisco and Fortinet Firewalls. It's hard to compare.

Installation and understanding are a bit challenging with Cisco, whereas Sophos is easier to install and use.

We have a FortiGate firewall at another location. We recently purchased it.

The initial setup is very, very easy.

The deployment process took me more than two to three hours, including all the checks. I had a backup of the earlier Sophos firewall, so I just restored it and verified everything.

One person for support and checking, so two in total are enough for deployment and maintenance of the solution.

I would definitely advise to use Sophos. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We are resellers.

The SD-WAN feature stands out as the most valuable aspect.

Fortinet surpasses Sophos in terms of support, particularly with its comprehensive five-one feature console. 

Additionally, there are notable differences between appliance models, including variations in hardware, utility, and product offerings. 

It is essential to compare these aspects to ensure optimal performance and functionality. 

While Sophos may not excel in the support aspect, it still provides satisfactory performance overall. 

However, other solutions may offer better support and resource availability.

I have been working with Sophos XG for three years.

Sophos XG is a stable solution.

Sophos appliances typically offer a fixed level of throughput, which means their scalability may be limited compared to more flexible solutions. 

It is important to consider this aspect when implementing Sophos for your organization. 

Technical support is good.

When considering master gold names, it is evident that they offer a competitive package.

I would rate technical support an eight out of ten.

Microsoft's protection has received positive feedback and strong on-site support from both customers and partners. 

Their response to cases, including targeted remediation, has been prompt and efficient. 

In certain instances, there is a reliance on Microsoft's expertise and direct involvement to ensure a satisfactory resolution.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy.

The price is reasonable.

The licensing cost in the final currency amount, is 163,080, with three years of support. 

Support costs are approximately 50 percent.

As for advice on implementing Sophos, it would depend on your specific requirements and the desired features you seek in a security solution.

Evaluating factors such as support, performance, compatibility, and cost-effectiveness is essential when making a decision.

It is recommended to carefully assess your organization's needs and consult with Sophos representatives or IT professionals to determine if Sophos is the right fit for your environment.

It is recommended to carefully assess your organization's needs and consult with Sophos representatives or IT professionals to determine if Sophos is the right fit for your environment.

I would rate Sophos XG an eight out of ten.

Sophos XG primarily serves as a means to regulate user traffic, enabling control over internet usage and website accessibility. It also facilitates the connection of branches and conducts malware scans on network traffic. These are the main purposes typically associated with servers. In terms of features, Sophos XG excels in catering to customers seeking a comprehensive network security solution. It incorporates various functionalities that would otherwise require the purchase of multiple solutions from other cybersecurity vendors. This unified threat management platform encompasses a firewall, IPS, web proxy, mail gateway, web application firewall, sandbox, and DLP module. From the customer's perspective, Sophos XG offers an all-in-one solution for network security needs. However, it is primarily designed for small and medium businesses rather than enterprises.

One of the standout features of Sophos XG is its proprietary VPN technology known as RID (Remote Internet Device). This unique technology provides efficient branch connectivity without the need to invest in additional firewalls for each branch. By utilizing an affordable device called RED, users can effectively control and establish connections in a cost-effective manner. Additionally, the solution is feature-rich.

Sophos XG boasts an extensive and finely-tuned proxy that offers impressive capabilities. Its comprehensive database of malicious websites is remarkably vast.

The support from the vendor needs to be improved.

I have been using Sophos XG for approximately six years.

I rate the stability of Sophos XG a six out of ten.

The scalability of the solution is limited to three nodes and may not be sufficient for extensive scaling. It is well-suited for small to medium-sized organizations. However, when it comes to large enterprises, particularly those with a distributed structure, Sophos can effectively cater to their needs. Distributed enterprises, characterized by numerous branches and a small employee count per branch, can benefit from Sophos XG capabilities. However, for larger enterprise customers with high network loads, Sophos XG may not meet the necessary requirements in terms of handling the network's capacity.

Most of our customers are small to medium-sized.

I rate the scalability of Sophos XG a five out of ten.

The support could improve. This is due to recent acquisitions. The time it takes to resolve an issue takes too long.

The response time from Sophos is deemed unacceptable by users. When opening a support case with any vendor, an automated email is typically received. However, in the case of Sophos, this automated email, lacking a personal touch, can take up to a week to arrive. Such delays are considered highly unsatisfactory. Consequently, the quality of their support has significantly deteriorated. As a result, users are reluctant to open support cases and would rather reinstall an appliance themselves than go through the support process.

I rate the support from Sophos XG a one out of ten.

Negative

The initial setup process of Sophos XG may pose some challenges. However, once configured, Sophos XG proves to be remarkably user-friendly. The activation of the appliance may require a reliable internet connection and can be a bit cumbersome. Nevertheless, once activated, the overall experience becomes significantly smoother.

The process of installation can take one to seven days. However, the time depends on many factors, such as customer size, and overall environment.

I rate the initial setup of Sophos XG a seven out of ten.

The price of the solution is reasonable when compared to the market.

You have to buy the appliance and pay for the license that matches your needs.

I rate the price of Sophos XG a seven out of ten. 

The solution had stability issues in the past but they have been resolved.

Before making a purchase, it is advisable to emphasize the importance of account managers and support from the vendor. In the past, the common practice was to involve the vendor's on-site personnel, such as the country manager in Saudi Arabia, when opening a support case. By opening the support case and sharing the support ID with the country manager, they could facilitate faster escalation and assistance behind the scenes. Essentially, contacting the sales representatives can help expedite the support process.

I rate Sophos XG a nine out of ten.

The solution is a layer 7 next-generation firewall, which we use as a firewall and router. We customize rules to help with our security.

We like the layer 7 capability. We have a couple of servers behind the XGS firewall which understands HTTP packets. The solution offers a very accurate setup, and we can use it as a kind of reverse proxy device. Based on the connected URL, we can direct traffic to different servers without a solution.

The solution is very user-friendly, and the GUI is so good that I don't have to use the CLI. This eliminates the need for typing; clicking allows me to get to what I'm looking for.

The application is a little slow; it takes five to ten seconds to respond to every click when configuring. If we need to do significant configuration, it can take a lot of time. This might be because we have a low-end machine, and it could be faster with a high-end one.

We have been working with Sophos XGS for nine months. 

The stability has always been good, we haven't encountered any issues. 

I can't speak much to the scalability as we haven't scaled the tool. I don't think it is scalable the way I have it configured, but there is a high-availability function in the menus. I don't know if the configuration is automatically transferred to new devices.

We have 600 users working behind the solution, and it is very lightweight in terms of maintenance. Sophos provides free web access, so we can go to their website and configure the firewall, which is automatically passed on to the device.

I escalated a question regarding a license issue, and they solved it very quickly, so I rate the tech support highly.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It has an old-style GUI, so we just followed the steps, and much of the setup was automatic.

We implemented via an in-house team. 

We must purchase separate web server licenses, as they are not included in the regular device license. I would rate the product an eight out of ten in terms of price. It's relatively affordable.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

For personal use, I suggest pfSense, but for business applications, Sophos is great because they have better support and offer an excellent GUI, which makes XGS very easy to operate. pfSense offers console access and is a lot more configurable, which is why I prefer it for home use.

I would advise potential customers to get a free trial license, as it offers the freedom to trial the solution to see if it has the functionality and configuration options required.

The performance is good. 

It is scalable.

Technical support has been helpful in general. 

The fabric solution, the access points, and the WiFi, is not being delivered to Egypt due to some regulations. It's hard to get any devices in Egypt right now.  I need one solution and one centralized interface to monitor all the switches, access points, firewalls, and everything. I found this in Fortinet. Sophos is falling short.

We'd like an interface that can monitor everything. 

The costs could be better. 

I've used the solution for two to three years. 

I can't speak to the stability, however, the performance is good. 

The solution can scale well. It's not a problem to expand it. 

We have about 400 people on the solution currently. 

Technical support is good. 

We also worked with Fortinet. While we are on Sophos right now, we're also moving again towards Fortinet. I'm waiting on the delivery right now. 

I am implementing a new public solution for access points and switches. I'm going to FortiGate since it offers a full solution, and it is already delivered to the country, Egypt. With the Sophos access points, they are not delivering regarding regulatory issues and something like that.

We do have some people on the solution that maintains it. I don't handle the initial step myself. We have a team that does it. 

Our own team can handle the initial implementation.

The pricing of Sophos is the same as Fortinet. In general, the solutions in the market are all around the same price. 

When you go to finalize the project and include another competitor, the distributor tends to give a big discount on the solution to exit to another one.

I'm a customer and end-user. 

I don't know which version of the solution we're currently on. I'm the director of the department, and therefore, I'm not working with it directly. There's a team that's working on the versions and upgrading software and so on, while handling the technical issues. 

I'm just dealing with the high level of design or decision-making.

It's not a bad solution. It's a good option and it takes a market share in Egypt. However, I like Fortinet as they have a device that's reaching in the market and the cost is not bad. They also have an impressive monitoring interface with FortiAnalyzer and FortiManager. 

I'd rate Sophos seven out of ten. 

Most of the features that we take advantage of are packet tutoring, web and application filtering, bandwidth management, and also multi-link management.

The most useful aspect of the solution for us is the reporting. Commonly, the reporting is separate, whereas, with Sophos, it's already in-built, so you don't need to invest in another reporting tool.

It offers an easy initial implementation.

The first time a person sets it up, they will need training.

We’d like to see an easy migration. They did an upgrade on VMware that might have affected things. We’d like them to return to something like they were running before from 2018 going to 2019.

The scalability could be better.

I’ve been dealing with the solution for the past year. IN total, I have used it for about seven years.

Every appliance has some problems. That said, while Sophos once had these issues, the company could immediately address those problems.

It is stable if you will be going to use VMware. They will give you an option if you want to try the new VMware.

The scalability is limited. In their firewall, there’s only a maximum of two appliances, or you have to cluster it. However, if you expand beyond that, there will be some limitations.

Right now, we have about 50 users. If you count the other branches, it’s closer to 200.

The support has been quite good. We are happy with their capabilities.

I’ve used Fortigate, SonicWall, Check Point, and NetBox brands in the past. We switched to Sophos for the easy interface and user-friendliness.

The initial setup is not really complex. If you're already familiar with the firewall, it will be simple. It will be already easier for the engineer as well. That said, if you're just starting, it will be a bit complex. You will need training

For us, since we have some other branches that we use to interconnect with our main branch, the deployment takes about three days with the other branches.

You only need two people to manage the deployment and maintenance.

I’m not sure of the exact pricing. However, some of it does go towards acquisition costs. In general, my understanding is that they are a bit cheaper than other options.

We both use and sell the solution.

We are using an older version of the solution. It’s not the most up-to-date.

I’d rate the solution nine out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to those who are implementing their security infrastructure to reach compliance. It does not hamper the business operations either.

I am an integrator of this solution, and I have installed it in small- and medium-sized businesses and schools.

My company now spends less time tracking issues because of the security provided by Sophos XG in conjunction with Sophos Endpoint protection.

The security of the solution, thanks to the built-in unified threat management, is one of its most valuable features. Plus, one single pane of glass is all you need to manage the whole solution, and web management can be done from anywhere. If I get a call and I'm at home, I can open the solution in a web browser and address the situation.

I have been using this solution since 2013.

The stability of this solution is excellent. 

The solution is available in different sizes. As long as you purchase a version that is larger than you currently need, there is room to grow. If you purchase one for your current needs, then the scalability is not good and you're going to have to repurchase if you want to scale up. On a scale of one to ten, I would give this solution a five or six for scalability. 

I would rate the technical support as a ten out of ten. I'm a Sophos partner, and their partner support is excellent. 

Positive

I previously used Cisco Meraki, but Sophos XG has built-in web filtering and is a better overall security solution. Due to these features, I have tried to migrate as many of my schools to Sophos XG as possible.

On a scale of one to five, with five being complex, I would rate the initial setup as a four. If you don't understand the terminology and how Sophos designates the way they do things, then it is a little confusing.

Depending on the location, most deployments take a day. We leave the current firewall in place while we configure the new one, then we swing the cable over and fire up the new firewall. That way if we have to take it back offline, we can keep the client productive until we are done configuring the new firewall.

For deployment you really only need one person, and maintenance can easily be handled by one person, too.

The pricing depends on the size. Each Sophos XG solution is custom fit to the size of the client's network. For example, for the XG 135, you're looking at a yearly subscription. You can get a one-year subscription for a few hundred dollars, or a three-year subscription for $1,500-$1,600, so it's not bad. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. I would rate the pricing as a three point eight on a scale of one to five.

I've had schools running different firewalls with subscriptions and different web filters with subscriptions, and I've found that it is less expensive for smaller schools to run Sophos XG with its unified threat management instead of multiple appliances.

I have evaluated some other options. It really boils down to price, and I haven't had a chance to explore Palo Alto much. I've played with PortaNet a little bit, but I think that Sophos XG has better features for the price point.

For the standard end user, self-based training is necessary. When you get into the Sophos XG firewall and try to start creating NAT rules, it can be a little cumbersome for a novice. It's pretty easy once you know how to do it, but it will be hard for anybody who doesn't have experience.

My advice to someone purchasing this solution would be to look closely at the licensing package to make sure they get what they need.

For small businesses and small schools, I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten.

We are using the Sophos XG in a different manner than the typical use case. We have the physical box, and we are using Sophos XG on the cloud.

We have two different types. We have two different Sophos XG we're running. We're running one on the Microsoft Azure cloud which mostly all security on the cloud goes through the Sophos XG. The second Sophos XG is running on our own physical local data center.

We are doing something similar to an IPsec between Azure and the local data center. So we are doing an IPsec between the two. We connected all our resources and we mostly run the applications on Microsoft Azure. Were now are doing IPsec between the two data centers.

Most of the features Sophos XG has are valuable. However, if I have two different  ISP, I'm able to create an automatic switch between the two ISPs. I can do the same thing for the cloud as well. If I have two subnets coming from the cloud, I'm able to create a type of switch between both of them where if there is traffic on one and has the traffic drop, I'm able to switch to the other ISP without any problems. It's a normal feature and I get to enjoy the ability to switch between services with no issues.

Security is one of the major reasons we are deploying Sophos XG in our process.

We recently did an upgrade on the Sophos XG firmware and we were surprised that after the upgrade,  the automatic switch actually we were using did not work anymore.

We try to understand exactly why it wasn't working with the new 18.5 firmware, but we could not figure it out. I realized that I was stuck with the main ISP. If there's an outage, it was not reliable on the network any longer.

We had to reverse, back to the old firmware even though we were still trying to fix the new version. It is a very efficient feature for our operation. If it was not there, it could make the workings of our operation inefficient. It is one of the best features of Sophos XG. It makes operations very efficient. You don't have to worry about anything at all. We are using the entire Sophos package, such as Sophos endpoint, Sophos XGR, Sophos ZGR.

The documentation can improve with Sophos XG. This will allow our network engineer to work better with the solution. Additionally, they can improve the ability to filter down devices. Recently we were faced with a challenge where we needed to restrict mobile phone users on the network but we realized that we couldn't do this with the solution. 

Recently I was looking at the Cisco Meraki solution, to see what it can do in terms of capacity. There's one feature that stood out to me, and that feature has the ability to implement some policies. Organizations need to have security policies in place. I would like the ability to create policies.

I have been using Sophos XG for approximately two and a half years.

We have approximately 60 people that are working on Sophos XG. However, the number is higher because Microsoft Azure routes every customer through the firewall. We have multiple layers and the traffic passes through Cloudflare and then gets directed to the Sophos XG on Microsoft Azure. The Sophos XG on Azure does all the filtering and routing to the private IP, allowing us not to use the public IP.

The DMs are private, and approximately 14,000 customers  pass through the Sophos XG and Microsoft Azure

The support from Sophos XG is very good. We can easily relate to the support.

I would rate the support from Sophos XG a two out of five. You cannot have good support without good documentation.

If you look at the software environment now, anywhere you go, you see the documentation for everything that has been done. Sophos XG has documentation, however, you should not need to have a certification to be able to understand it.

I have used Sophos Cyberoam previously.

If we had better documentation we would be able to implement Sophos XG better for the organization's exact specifications. When you have already come up with your networking strategy, presented it to the company, then you find out the new framework doesn't conform with the organizational strategy. You have to start going back and receiving approval for a new strategy. However, you are not even sure what the strategy is going to be with the new framework, because everything has changed. Most of the automatic resources stop working.

There is a high chance I do not even know why it is not working or what the major issue is. We have realized the package wasn't switching and we did a lot of troubleshooting for almost a week to understand why. We switch over to our old firewall, then we finally understood that it was something that has to do with the new 18.5 firmware in Sophos XG. Immediately we switch back to the old firmware, this fixed out problems we were having at that point.

I would rate the implementation of Sophos XG a two out of five.

The initial deployment was done approximately three years ago and it was done by a third party because of some complex considerations, such as the VOIP Gateway.

However, since the initial implementation, we have been managing it by our own in-house network engineers and every modification to the network has been done in-house.

We have three network engineers, that work on the solution and the network. They can manage all the features and securities. The amount of people needed to maintain the solution depends on the organization's architecture. 

In information security, the only way you rate ROI is by the level of information you're securing. I will ask myself how much is the information I'm securing is worth? The worth of what I'm securing will determine the amount of cost that I'm spending on the information secured. If I were to judge it that way, the ROI is high. 

I would rate the ROI of Sophos XG a five out of five.

We pay for two licenses for the use of Sophos XG annually and it is a flat fee. We do not have everyone going through both of the Sophos XG firewalls a the same time and the Sophos XG on Microsoft Azure is only accessible from the VPN.

Sophos XG has changed its pricing model for extreme protection.

I rate the price of Sophos XG a two out of five.

When we were evaluating other solutions we looked at Barracuda and it had an old GUI. This was an issue when we were making decisions between Barracuda and Sophos XG.

The solution has served its purpose in my organization.

I rate Sophos XG a nine out of ten.

This product is our firewall that protects our connections from the internet. It controls access for our employees when they want to access streaming media websites such as YouTube.

It controls the connection to our resources that originate from outside of our infrastructure.

We use it to monitor users and their activity including which websites they visit and what portals they use.

This product is compatible with my business and our market.

This Sophos product has a lot of features included.

This product does load-balancing between our connections. This is helpful because our infrastructure in Egypt is not stable and it requires several connections to achieve the required performance.

Sophos Control Center is a good feature. We can monitor everything from the control panel.

It can be used to create a VPN connection between users and our server. 

The performance and speed of the appliance are good. I have also tried the software deployment, without the appliance, and it was also good.

The VPN features can be improved. Due to covid-19, we have a lot of employees that work from home and we need better VPN capabilities.

We would like to be able to override policies set by the country. For example, VPN is banned in Egypt. If we could bypass this then it would be helpful because it would allow us to distribute our connections, or services, to other sites. 

After upgrading from version 17 to 18, not everything is in the same place in the interface. For example, the firewall rules are in a different place. Consequently, my IT team department cannot understand the portal and find it not user-friendly. They were used to the previous version.

Better training should be available because there is nothing on the Sophos website to assist with setting up VPN connections or VPN SSL certificates. For instance, there is nothing to explain how to configure the DDNS.

We have been using Sophos XG for between six and seven years, since 2015.

This product is usually stable. In the past few days, I have found problems where some services are not stable. This is something that I have used the portal to submit a ticket for.

We have 90 people working on the network concurrently. Combined, they have between 300 and 350 open sessions.

When the size of our staff increased, we purchase another appliance to expand our infrastructure. Beyond that, I haven't been able to test scalability.

In addition to the recent ticket I created for technical support, I keep in touch with them. The support is okay.

Previously, we used the Microsoft TMG firewall, and I have also used Cisco ASA.

I already had some experience with Sophos and firewalls. The first time I attended a Sophos event, I made a deal with Sophos and they helped me learn how to transition from TMG.

The user interface with Sophos is easier to use. For example, Sophos makes it is easier to create firewall rules for a VPN connection to the outside. With the other vendors such as Cisco, the process is more complex. 

Fortinet is also a top firewall provider but I recommend Sophos because it is more stable. I have limited experience with FortiGate.

The initial setup was easy. It was not complex for our IT department but you need some technical knowledge to do things such as creating a VPN connection between two endpoints, either site-to-site or site-to-client. You should also be familiar with SSL certificates.

The setup took between two and three hours, and after that, we had to prepare our network connections. It took two days in total.

No maintenance is required for the appliance.

We used a system integrator to assist us with the transition from TMG to Sophos.

We pay licensing fees of approximately $2,000. We have a contract for three years.

The vendor is very professional when it comes to firewall products. Aside from the issues with the VPN, It has all of the features that we need.

My advice for anybody considering this product is that the result depends on your country. In my country, there are a lot of problems with ransomware and viruses. Sophos has already helped to mitigate and stop issues such as these on our network. It is the best firewall on the market.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I primarily use the solution for managing my firewall. I'm managing my internet and my laptops in my company. I'm a personal domain controller. I'm tasked with blocking some websites with it and I'm managing my updates through it. I'm basically controlling the flow of the internet through it.

I block a lot of sites. I'm controlling the flow of the internet directed to Office 365 so that people can use it easily and fluently. They can upload and send emails easily without hassle and without accessing the internet. I'm also controlling Teams, Zoom, and other stuff for chatting online. Without this solution, I would have no control.

Content blocking for websites is the most valuable aspect of the solution. A lot of employees always want to use Facebook and other non-work-related sites. I'm always blocking that.

The initial setup is easy.

The stability is good.

Scaling is not an issue. 

The reporting needs to be much better. Sometimes I have a lot of trouble understanding what they mean.

Sometimes it misses websites. For example, websites the users shouldn't be able to enter, or sometimes these websites are not shown in this log viewer. It's just occasional misses here and there. 

Technical support could be more responsive and quicker in getting to a solution. 

I've been using the solution for at least three years now.

I have found the stability to be very good. There have been no hiccups, no restarts, nothing like that. It doesn't hang and there are barely any bugs. 

It's my understanding that they have a solution called RED, and I can upgrade it with another one to make a VPN between them. I haven't tried it yet. I'm looking at it as I have another office. I want to research scaling and have the offices together. From what I have seen, it will be easy.

Right now, we have about 50 users and 10 VPNs. That includes everyone from financial and procurement managers to the CEO, chairman, and HR department, and other operations staff.

We don't have any plans to increase users right now as we haven't increased in population, in employees number. That said, I use it a lot every day. I have to manage my firewalls through it.

In my experience, technical support takes a while to get things done. In the past, I stuck with them for a while. It took about three weeks to serve us up a solution. I don't remember what the problem was as it was a long time ago. It might have been something about the subscription or something like that. What I do remember is it took a very long time. 

I had a previous firewall, and I just swapped it out. I didn't have to change anything about my network. We previously used a firewall called MikroTik.

With MikroTik, its GUI was very bad. It's very old. Everything was manual. There were no tutorials and it was open-source. You had to search for yourself and do everything yourself. There was no support even from the company.

It was really easy for me, to be honest. The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It's not overly complex. I had a firewall before that, so I knew what to expect. The implementation was done by a company that I bought this from. They installed it for me. It took about an hour and a half, or something like that. 

I can't recall how many staff covered deployment. The deployment happened three years ago now. 

I didn't need the assistance of an integrator or reseller. 

The solution has saved me a lot of time and enhanced my workflow for my company. It enhanced employees' work time and enhanced the internet connectivity for emails. On top of that, there was no downtime with the internet. That was the basic ROI we've seen.

The subscription for this product is yearly. The last time I bought it two years ago it was about $2,000. There's just a subscription fee. There aren't any other costs. 

I also looked at Fortinet, however, from my research, I was told that Sophos had better reporting. With Fortinet, you have to buy a server to handle reporting. With Sophos, this is unnecessary. 

I'm a customer and an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.