Sophos UTM Reviews

My company deals with eight clients who use Sophos UTM. My company's clients mainly use Sophos UTM for protection against threats and for other purposes like content filtering, web filtering, and VPNs.

The most valuable features of the solution are application filtering and web filtering.

Sophos UTM needs to streamline the VPN configuration. It also needs to fix the concerns related to the solution's Port Address Translation (PAT) rule.

In the future, I want Sophos UTM to provide users with sandboxing features.

The scalability of the product is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required. Sophos should give some flexibility to users, especially when you run low on things like memory and storage.

The support team's turnaround time is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Sophos UTM since 2018. My company has a partnership with Sophos UTM.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

With Sophos UTM, I have noticed that you cannot upgrade the physical devices, meaning you cannot change the memory or the hardware. If you want an upgrade, then you have to go to select the next model or a bigger model offered by Sophos.

One of my company's clients uses the tool in an environment consisting of 20 people, while another client uses the tool in an environment consisting of 20,000 people.

Whenever my company contacts the support team of Sophos, we get really good support.

I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

I have experience with Fortinet FortiGate, Check Point, and Cisco ASA. My company uses different products depending on the preferences of our customers.

The product's initial setup phase was relatively easy. I rate the product's initial setup phase a six out of ten.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in three days, depending on the size of an organization. If it's a small company, you can finish the deployment process in a day, but if it's a big company with a lot of requirements, it could even take a week to do the full deployment. The product's initial deployment takes a few hours, but the customization to be carried out to suit an organization's structure takes time, and it depends on how big the company is and what customizations the customer wants in terms of modules.

Sophos UTM is a reasonably priced product.

I rate the product's price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

Sophos UTM is a good tool, especially for SMBs. Sophos UTM has a lot of features that enterprise-sized businesses ask for, but they don't really work very well. For SMBs, the product's features are very good. The setup phase of Sophos UTM can be carried out quickly. In Sophos UTM, it is easy to troubleshoot.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

We have deployed Sophos UTM on cloud and on-premises. The cloud provider is Azure.

There are about 200 people who are using this solution in my organization.

From Cyberoam and the early builds of Sophos SG, they have developed higher integration between Sophos UTM and the computers' endpoint antiviruses. We can isolate the infected machine from the network, but an IT technician or cybersecurity professional can remove it from the machine and disinfect it. 

It has the capability of blocking HTTPS traffic, but you need the Sophos Central Intercept X subscription for that. It gives us the ability to manage our firewalls from the cloud and deploy a unified configuration onto them. Other competitors like Meraki have that ability, but they fail to optimize it in the way that Sophos has.

Last year, Sophos had some major internal management changes that negatively impacted their support. 

I would like to see better reporting and better alerting.

I would rate the stability as nine out of ten.

The scalability is the same as support and the initial setup. The scalability depends on the person who is doing the initial design. If I choose a device that will serve 10 users and my users jump to 50, then I definitely have a big problem. If I choose a firewall that has 30 GBs of throughput, and all of a sudden I jump to 50 GBs throughput, it's my problem because I didn't do the initial design properly. It's not a problem with the device.

If you do a proper design, assume growth, and buy a model or brand that can digest that growth, then it's scalable. Sophos can handle more requests and requirements than what is in the data sheet.

I would rate the scalability as nine out of ten.

I would rate technical support as three out of five.

The level of support might be acceptable for a smaller company. My organization works in mining and drilling, and we operate in 18 countries and five continents. We needed a better response time, especially in regards to cyber security.

I've used multiple other solutions. At one point in time, we were going to replace all of our Sophos units with Meraki, but I canned that completely because they're incomparable. I also compared the Sophos firewall with other virtual firewalls, but that's a bit unfair because that's an on-premises device and the others are virtual. I've used Microsoft Azure Firewall and Sophos Azure Firewall, but I canceled Microsoft Azure Firewall.

We compared Sophos with Cisco Meraki, and we chose Sophos. On the virtual side as a UTM, I compared Sophos XG for Azure with the Microsoft firewall for Azure. Sophos won on the cost side, which I consider to be a minor cost. 

In terms of benefits, features, and ease of configuration, Sophos won.

Compared to other solutions, initial setup is very simple, but it depends on the configuration design that you want. That's where the complexity is.

First, you get the firewall or the router, connect it to the LAN pool, do the initial setup, and then setup the LAN, WAN, and the basic tools. It's the same for FortiGate, IBM ISS, Cisco, Meraki, IronPort, and Websense. Across all those products, the setup is very easy. If there's any problem with initial setup, It has more to do with the lack of experience from the technician setting it up than the complexity of the hardware. 

The only interaction we do with Sophos units is when we are adding new users, removing users, and for other administration tasks. There are two people involved with maintenance, upgrading the firewalls, and testing new scenarios.

My whole team does administration. Comparing Cyberoam to Sophos, the overhead of troubleshooting performance issues is at a minimum. The only time I need to replace a firewall is when it gets burnt out because of a power problem, which is usually something major and doesn't have to do with the product itself.

I would rate the pricing as 2.5 out of 5.

The problem with the Sophos is not the cost of the hardware but the cost of the modules, packages, and the subscription.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

The solution is used mainly for user management and access control. 

It's a little bit easier to use. It's user-friendly, and then there's a lot of documentation for it online, so it's easy to manage without necessarily dealing with a big learning curve. It is easy to understand, basically.

If you need to troubleshoot, everything is basically on Google. 

The solution is stable. 

It's a scalable product.

The support could be better.

They need to improve their email protection. Their email protection is horrible. They have an email protection license that is paid for. However, they need to improve on email protection capabilities.

They need to have proper reporting. What they offer no is weird. I need to get another application to give me a clear diagram of my network. This should instead come directly from Sophos. 

I've been using the solution for two years now. 

The product is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is redundant enough. I don't have any issues with it.

The solution scales well. 

We have about 500 people on the product right now. We also have 100 users on the VPN.

It is better to Google rather than use technical support. 

They are slow to respond and then the response doesn't exactly give you what you want.

I understand they can't give you a solution to something that you'd expect them to. They try to give you something. You're going to go to Google and find the information on Google faster and easier anyway. 

We worked with Cisco mainly in the past. When we went to renew with Cisco, we found the pricing to be quite high. We're happy now with Sophos. We have no interest in switching to anything else.

The initial setup is very easy. The interface makes it simple.

I'm not sure how long the deployment took exactly.

We have four people that are able to handle maintenance. 

I was able to set it up myself, however, you do really need to know it or work with someone who does.

The cost could be considered reasonable based on other plans. However, when I was looking at when you renew our licenses, the pricing is a little bit weird. When you renew your license, the licenses are at the cost of buying a new device in your plan. I haven't renewed yet. However, I would need to figure out that aspect. 

I can't recall the exact costs of the product as it's been a while since we originally licensed it. 

Compared to Juniper, the difference is the pricing. It's more affordable than Cisco or Juniper, actually.

I'm a user and a consultant.

I'd advise potential new users that they should let someone that knows how to do it set it up fast. You should work with someone that knows how to do it.

I'd rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use Sophos UTM for our organization's network security.

The most valuable feature of Sophos UTM is the endpoint protection feature.

The technical support team’s response time could be improved.

I have been using Sophos UTM since 2018.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

We use the solution daily in our organization.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

I previously used Kaspersky. I switched to Sophos UTM because of the features that it is offering.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution’s initial setup ten out of ten.

The solution's deployment took a week for the first time because our organization is big and has over 300 endpoint equipment. It takes a few hours to do the renewals now. We deployed Sophos UTM from the Active Directory. Three people were involved when we deployed the solution for the first time.

You cannot really say that the solution is expensive, given the protection it gives.

Sophos UTM has improved our network's threat detection and response. It has been good so far because we don't have many attacks. We use the solution's web filtering feature for our organization's security. We use the firewall to protect our endpoint equipment and protect against any infiltration in our network. We also use the solution’s VPN feature.

Around one or two people are required for the solution’s maintenance. I would recommend the solution to other users because it has helped us. The solution's installation and deployment are seamless, and its protection is secure.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for firewall security.

The protection on offer is pretty good.

Direct controller management has been quite useful.

It offers reasonable pricing.

The scalability is good.

It is stable. 

Technical support has been fine. 

I don't have any notes for improvements at this time.

I'd like to see some filter features added in the next release. 

There can be a delay when it comes to reaching out to technical support. 

I've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. I'd rate it nine out of ten in terms of reliability. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have about 1,000 users on the solution at this time. The solution is very scalable. I'd rate it nine out of ten. 

We use the solution quite extensively. 

Technical support has been fine. They are helpful and responsive. That said, sometimes, there is a delay when we try to reach out to them. 

Positive

It is very simple to set up. I'd rate the ease of implementation nine out of ten. 

I cannot recall how long the original deployment took. 

We did not use any outside assistance. We handled the setup ourselves. 

I'd rate the affordability of the solution seven out of ten. The pricing is decent. 

We're a customer and end-user.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. I do not have the version number on hand. 

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd recommend the solution to others. 

Our company uses the solution as an edge firewall. 

We have 500 users and the solution is managed by five technicians. 

The solution's sandboxing, application center, and database engine are good. 

The endpoint device detection tool integrates very well with Edge devices. 

The reporting system needs to allow for customizations because many reports do not include details that we expect. 

It would be beneficial to have a security fabric feature like FortiGate that integrates with UTM devices and reports to expose issues. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very easy to scale up and has no limitations. 

Technical support is very knowledgeable and responds immediately to issues.

I rate technical support a ten out of ten. 

Positive

The initial setup is easy and I rate it an eight out of ten.

We implemented the solution in-house and it does not require much maintenance at all. Three technicians handle any maintenance needed. 

The solution's pricing is based on a licensing model and is competitive. 

The solution was 20,000 Rial about five years ago. 

I rate pricing a ten out of ten. 

Per market analysis, the solution is in the top three with FortiGate and Palo Alto. 

All three solutions are comparable so the best fit depends on your engines, environment, and requirements. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use Sophos UTM for endpoint antivirus.

The management suite is easy and the agent is easy to develop.

At the very least, keep existing. I will continue to use Sophos. If Sophos maintains its current ease of management, I believe I will continue to use it.

I would like them to keep the features as they are.

The GUI can be improved. It is not as good as Trend Micro, but I still like it.

The GUI could be more user-friendly.

Now, they offer a SaaS product in comparison to XDR and, TRM, which stands for automatic analysis of virus behavior or deadline. Currently, for example, when there is a threat, we analyze it ourselves, but now they offer automatic analysis because Sophos' XDR is based on cloud PCS.

I would like them to include automatic analysis for virus behavior and also cloud PCS.

I started using Sophos UTM in 2005.

Sophos UTM is a stable solution.

Sophos UTM is scalable.

The endpoint will be decommissioned next year, but we intend to continue using the Sophos XDR.

Because it is in Indonesia, technical support is only available via email and on the website. There does not appear to be enough technical advice available from support.

The support does not appear to be developed, and they lack expertise.

We are able to manage ourselves.

We have documentation available online

I would rate the technical support a two out of five. Technical support could be improved.

When compared to Trend Micro has a compact and bundle layer, whereas Sophos allows us to select the module. The module layer can be separated. For Trend Micro, we buy as a bundle purchase and they will give us everything.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to set up and configure.

I would rate the initial setup a four out of five.

When compared to Trend Micro, the price is currently competitive.

The pricing is nearly the same. Implying that each endpoint costs approximately one million rupees.

It will cost approximately $67 US per device. We have 300 devices in our organization.

I would rate the pricing a three out of five.

The price could be improved. In my opinion, we could get a discount. We have already contacted Asia Pacific sellers, and they have agreed to keep the reduced price if we upgrade in March 2023.

For the time being, it is enough for us. As I previously stated, some companies that use Sophos may be unfamiliar with the full range of Sophos protocol offerings.

Before you start implementing Sophos UTM  be aware of the protocols.

I would rate Sophos UTM an eight out of ten.

We use Sophos UTM for firewall management and for some of the other modules it provides, such as email and firewall proxies.

The most valuable feature of Sophos UTM is the efficiency and mail filtering module.

Sophos UTM could improve the way the configuration has to be done. I have to do the configuration through the command line interface but if it could be done through the graphical user interface it would be much better.

I have been using Sophos UTM for approximately three years.

Sophos UTM is a highly stable solution. It has high availability.

We have approximately more than 1,000 employees in my company using the solution.

I have used Fortinet previously and I found it to be easier to deploy and maintain than Sophos UTM

The initial setup of Sophos UTM is straightforward. Additionally, the configuration is simple. When we first did the deployment it took approximately two days.

The configuration of this solution is easier than some of the competitors. In some of the other solutions, when there is synchronization between two firewalls there are times you need to break all the configurations and start from the beginning.

When we did the first installation of the solution we used a third party to assist. However, we now do the full implementation of the solution using our team.

The price of the license for Sophos UTM is approximately $5,500. The solution is less expensive than competitors.

The maintenance of the solution is easy, the documentation is very rich in content, and the report information is good. 

I rate Sophos UTM an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for security purposes. 

We use it as a WAF with an application firewall.

We can use it for VPN SSL as a remote-access VPN. We have used it on the internet for applications and web servers.

The product is easy to manage and easy to install. It's straightforward to manage.

It is stable.

The solution is scalable. 

They could use more SSL VPN support.

We'd like the setup to be even easier, if possible. 

I've been using the solution for four to five years.

It is stable and reliable. The performance is good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash.

The product can scale well.

We have about 500 users on the solution. We don't have plans to increase usage at this time. 

We have three years of support services. 

We have the Juniper SRX firewall, for local zones, process zones, and server zones.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not complex at all. 

It takes about two hours to set up. 

We have three to five engineers that are able to handle deployment and maintenance tasks. 

We handled the implementation ourselves. 

We have a three-year license and have support services as well. 

I'd recommend the solution to others.

I would rate it nine out of ten.

Sophos UTM offers considerable protection and employs a very well-structured pricing scheme.

It's a good choice for businesses that need a basic security solution with a good price-performance ratio. However, it's not a good choice for businesses that need a complex security solution. That's why I'm also considering Fortinet, which can provide a more comprehensive security solution.

I like the simplicity of Sophos UTM and the web filtering features.

The application control is really bad. It needs a lot of enhancements. The traffic shaping and bandwidth control, and application control need a lot of work.

In future releases, Sophos can enhance its quality of service. 

I have been using this solution for 11 years. 

There are two aspects to consider: software stability and hardware stability. The software is a bit stable, but the hardware needs a lot of improvement. So the software can be rated nine out of ten, but the hardware is only seven out of ten.

The software solution is not very scalable. So, it can be improved. 

We have about 50 customers right now using this solution. 

The initial setup is easy. It took half an hour to deploy. 

It is a complex security solution for firewalls. So there are a lot of implementation concerns. It's not like a wireless solution or something like that. So there's no direct answer for this one, especially for security solutions.

For the deployment, maintenance, and management, you need two security engineers. You need security engineers, not just regular engineers.

The ROI is extremely high.

The cost of the license depends on the size of the firewall appliance. There is a huge variety of pricing models.  

Sophos UTM has very reasonable pricing. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

It's a good firewall solution for small and medium businesses, but it's not the best choice for businesses with complex security requirements. 

I would recommend that businesses carefully consider their requirements before choosing Sophos UTM. If you need advanced application control, you should look for a different firewall solution.