Sophos XGS Reviews

We use the solution to control the network and for web browsing. It provides threat protection.

It increases productivity in our company. Everything is protected.

Deployment could be easier.

I have been using Sophos XGS for three years.

I have the company we bought from Cisco, which provides technical support. If anything goes wrong, we call them for any help and support.

Positive

With Cisco, You have to buy everything separately and request many options. It's preferable to get a full bundle like Sophos offers. Sophos includes everything in one package, and any additional features are less expensive than Cisco.

It is 20% more expensive than Sophos.

The initial setup is difficult. You need to take a course to learn how to deploy Sophos. With training and hands-on experience, it’s manageable now, but setting up Sophos for the first time was time-consuming. Deploying the security and configuring the network took a lot of effort initially, but the process becomes much easier once that's done.

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

We are happy and satisfied with all the features. There is nothing special there.

The main thing that we would like to see improved is ransom. They could provide something better. We are not using a public IP. 

I have been using Sophos XGS for the past year.

It is stable for our intended purposes.

Sophos XGS is scalable.

Technical support is very good.

It depends upon the requirement you may have. If we see that it is a straightforward requirement, it will be easy to implement.

Compared to Fortinet, the cost is high. Even compared to the U.S. market the market price is high.

We work with SonicWall and Fortinet. This depends upon the requirements you have. Sometimes the client wants a particular price, sometimes they are considering a solution, and sometimes it is pricing. It's based on the distributors, support, and installers.

I would rate Sophos XGS a seven out of ten.

All security solutions are the same. It depends on the size of the network and license. They have the same features. Brands provide extreme protection.

The solution is expensive.

I have been using Sophos XGS for four years.

The product is stable.

The solution is suitable for small and medium businesses.

Customer support is great.

Positive

The initial setup is easy and takes around 30 mins to complete.

The product’s pricing is average compared to other solutions.

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

We use this solution for security purposes, traffic filtering, voice filtering, blocking websites, traffic shaping, and wireless protection. We also use this solution to analyze malware threats and email protection logs.

Sophos XGS is profound as a firewall and security product. We have deployed Sophos XGS and Endpoint in several banking systems and government sites. Our customers are satisfied that Sophos XGS is continuously blocking websites and giving us reports on which apps, users or websites are vulnerable. As partners, we also benefit and have deployed several parallels on the customer side. In addition, Sophos has improved its technical support service, and customers are happy about the support.

The most valuable feature is the network policy and SD-WAN policy.

There was a hardware conflict with the software. Recently we did five RMA of Sophos hardware, and several customers said the hardware and firmware were faulty, so there is a dependency on the hardware. For some customers, EQuIS is also an issue, and when we claim RMA from Bangladesh, it takes almost one month to get the product. 

In addition, the firmware has some bugs because it continuously updates in 5.1, 5.3, and 5.7. So, if we randomly change the firmware, it's not fixable, and this should be improved. 

In Sophos XG Firewall, we can create a different zone, like LAN, DMZ, and MZ, but we cannot customize the WAN dual, so it would be good if we could do dual customization.

We have been using this solution for five years. It was called Sophos XG Firewall Endpoint before Sophos XGS. Recently we deployed XGS version 4300. It is deployed on-premises.

It is not a stable solution, and improvements can be made to firmware and hardware.

The scalability could be improved.

The technical support is helpful, but the response time could be faster. When we raise a case, there is sometimes a delay in responding. There is no toll-free number to call for emergency support in Bangladesh, so we call a Singapore number and wait a long time for technical support. When they eventually answer, they ask us many questions, which consumes a lot of time, and they sometimes transfer us to other technical engineers. This is a significant issue for us in Bangladesh and should be improved.

Sophos XGS was a tender proposal, and we chose it.

It was an easy setup, and it was not complex. The deployment depends on the customer's timeline, requirements and scope of work. Basic configuration takes about one or two days, and we deployed both in-house and in the customer environment. I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. One person can do deployment because we're not doing any mounting, and mounting requires two people. So configuration can also be done by one person.

They have annual licenses, and we have a three-year license. Unfortunately, I do not have information on the licensing costs.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten, and I would recommend this solution to others.

We normally use physical appliances for office and virtual appliances for datacenter.

XGS is similar to XG series but adds new Xstream Flow processors that are used to accelerate various functionalities that are normally done in x86 CPU.

Sophos will soon release SFOS v19 software which will utilize Xstream for even more functionalities like IPsec, SSLVPN, SDWAN and etc.

What I found most valuable in Sophos XGS is that it's very easy to manage.

Authentication with Azure AD needs improvement. It would be better if it could work directly without using local AD server. For comparison Fortinet FortiGate allows to use SAML authentication with Azure AD and does not require any local server. It is currently unknown to me, if or when it will be implemented on Sophos.

Local DHCP service also needs improvement. Windows DHCP service offers more functionality and is more flexible and easier to use. SFOS v18.5.3 added DHCP option functionality in the GUI - which previously worked only from CLI. 

I've been working with Sophos XGS since they came out. I cannot remember exactly the year and date, but it hasn't been so long, e.g. just one year.

It is very stable - have not had any issues.

The scalability of Sophos XGS is good. Normally we suggest the clients to use firewall as a service, since it gives more flexibility both for client and us, since usually we manage the client's firewall. There is a virtual version of the firewall which scales even more, since it can be upgraded to a license that offers more RAM and CPU cores. For us, it scales very well, e.g. I'm giving it the maximum score: ten out of ten.

If a client is looking for a new firewall, then we normally need to consider as much information as possible (user count, weight per user, LAN throughput, WAN throughput, functionalities and etc). If a client wants to pick a solution for larger environment, then we also ask recommendation from Sophos to get the most optimal solution.

Positive

The initial setup for Sophos XGS is very easy. From cloud it can be deployed even faster, since it allows to create configuration templates.

The ratio of price and functionality is good.

Licensing cost depends on particular model and required functionality:
- It is possible to use the firewall without any license, but then it will work only as port based firewall.
- Normally we suggest to use at least Standard License.
- Licensing cost for single appliance or active/passive HA cluster is the same - only 1 license.
- Active/Active cluster requires 2 licenses and performance gain is very small. It is better to use more powerful appliance. 

We are Sophos Gold partner and mainly like to use Sophos XGS firewalls.
If it a requirement by client, then we can also offer non-Sophos firewall solutions.

There are multiple models of Sophos XGS that we use, e.g. we use both desktop  and 1U sized models.

Sophos XGS can be fully cloud managed, and it's possible to deploy it directly from the cloud, that you installed the hardware, and maybe I have to use an ESB key, though I'm not sure. We haven't tried deploying it that way yet.

The only difference between Sophos XGS and Sophos XG is the software version that is supported on the hardware. The difference will be when the version 19 software comes up, as it will not work on Sophos XG.

I recommend Sophos XGS to others who are thinking of implementing it. I recommend for them to use it. Sophos firewall can be also used without additional firewall, but we strongly suggest using Standard license, which offers application filtering and IDS/IPS.

We use Sophos XGS mostly for website blocking, application blocking, and site-to-site VPN.

Compared to other products, Sophos XGS is a user-friendly solution.

It would be useful if Sophos XGS included DDNS-based features.

I have been using Sophos XGS for four years.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

Sophos XGS is a scalable solution. We have more than 50 users in our organization.

Sophos XGS provides good technical support. The support team has good knowledge of troubleshooting and fixing our issues.

The solution’s initial setup is complex.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution’s deployment takes half an hour to one hour.

Sophos XGS is a cost-effective solution.

I would recommend Sophos XGS to other users because it is more cost-effective than other products.

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

The best use case of Sophos XGS is for customers who use CMGs that manage the gateway of Microsoft, which was made obsolete years ago. Clients want to replace their proxy with some solution, and Sophos is one of the best bets.

The solution is good for web filtering. It's also possible to use it as a load balancer and a destination firewall and site-to-site channeling. Remote users can gain access via Sophos. It solves for a variety of uses that the client needs. 

In our market, they offer a web filter SSL VPN and they are very useful for the customer.

The initial setup is very simple. 

It's stable and reliable. 

We can scale the product.

Some firewall names like Palo Alto and FortiGate are very famous for security. People find them very secure. While Sophos is fairly secure, they aren't known for their security, and it's not an obvious selling point. Unfortunately, on Gartner, Magic Quadrant, and Forrester, Sophos doesn't have a good presence. They need to get better at marketing their abilities and expanding what they can do.

I would like to see them in third-party evaluation reports like Gartner, Magic Quadrant, or Forrester to make it easier for us to show our customers that Sophos is a leader in the market. It will be easier for us to sell them. Our market depends on what products are currently in Gartner and Forrester, and these platforms. 

We've been working with the solution for five to six years. 

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

The product is scalable. 

We have more than 100 clients on Sophos. 

Technical support is good and above average. 

Neutral

It is easy to set up the solution. It's not a complex process. 

While it depends on the magnitude of the customer's environment, normally the deployment only takes a day or two.

We do not require any outside assistance. We can handle the setup ourselves. 

If the client needs us to, we can deploy the solution for them. Since we sell the solution, we have a good understanding of the process. We have been doing implementations for years. 

The pricing is moderate. It's not overly expensive. They offer good licensing. 

We are using and selling the solution. We are deploying it for different customers.

When the customer wants to buy an appliance, definitely it's an on-prem solution. However, when it comes to an endpoint or a firewall as a service, they offer cloud solutions as well.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

We are primarily using the product for firewall issues, including protecting the network and so on.

It's much faster than the previous firewall, so you can do the work faster. There are no delays in the internet and network.

The performance is better than the other product that we've had. 

Reporting-wise, it's quite good. IPS detection and ATP is getting better and faster.

We have found the initial setup to be quite straightforward. 

The solution is stable.

It can scale well.

The reporting could always be improved upon. They need intelligent reporting, not just your simple, standard reports. 

I've used the solution for the past three months. 

This is a stable, reliable product. The performance is good. It's fast. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product can scale very well. It's not a problem if a company needs to expand. There are different sizes of products. It's a good idea to pick a larger size if you expect to scale. 

We have around 150 users on the solution at this point. They cover different roles from admins to front and back office.

We have a third-party provider that is giving us support. We don't communicate with Sophos directly.

I previously used WatchGuard. That was at a previous company. When I moved here, the organization already had Sophos. 

The initial setup is very simple and very straightforward. Since it was also migration in our case,  we had to do testing and so on. It took one week to deploy it.

We only need one person to handle the deployment and maintenance process. 

We had a third-party assist us during the implementation process.

We renew the license every three years. We get better pricing that way. There are no other expenses beyond the standard pricing. That said, there are additional subscription modules you might need. However, you pick them at the beginning, and it depends if you need them or not.

We did not evaluate other options. We already had the setup, and we didn't want to make any big changes.

I'm a customer and end-user. 

I've currently using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.