WatchGuard Firebox Reviews

The utilization of the WatchGuard Firebox system is as follows: the head office, located in Barbados, has two remote offices in New York and Toronto that utilize Cisco for their VPNs, which are running to these two locations for the branch offices. The email system has three locations for redundancy, two in the UK in Purley and London, and one in Toronto, Canada. Employees who work from home, access the office through mobile VPNs.

The WatchGuard Fire Box has greatly improved the functioning of our organization, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, the use of VPNs was primarily limited to IT support. However, with the rollout of the WatchGuard Fire Box, all of our staff members in Barbados, Toronto, and New York were able to seamlessly transition to working from home. The WatchGuard Fire Box also provides a unified track for virus scanning, which enhances the security of our connections. Additionally, we have moved our email off-island, which has made the SPA filtering from WatchGuard redundant. Overall, the WatchGuard Fire Box has played a critical role in enabling our organization to adapt to the challenges posed by the pandemic and work efficiently from home.

The most valuables feature of WatchGuard Firebox are the VPNs, and web filtering where we can stop users from going to malicious sites.

The VPN aspect of the WatchGuard Firebox is an area that could potentially benefit from improvement. We encountered difficulties while attempting to integrate Windows 11 laptops into the system, which resulted in unreliable connections. After some research, we discovered that this was primarily due to compatibility issues with Windows 11 and required a patch. However, it was still a challenge as it seemed that even when we tried to keep the laptops on Windows 10, they still exhibited the same issues as Windows 11 machines. Despite WatchGuard attributing the problem to Microsoft, we were eventually able to find a solution and all the machines are now functioning seamlessly.

The solution comes with a web interface that facilitates configurations, but it doesn't have the same level of functionality as the installed client or system manager. The web UI could be further improved.

In a future release, the detection of ransomware would be helpful. Ransomware is our biggest fear.

I have been using WatchGuard Firebox for approximately 20 years.

I rate the stability of WatchGuard Firebox a nine out of ten.

Approximately thirty individuals are currently utilizing the Watchguard Firebox solution. This includes a diverse range of individuals from the CEO and directors, to managers, secretaries, clerks, and even our receptionist. Given the recent trend of remote work, it has become increasingly necessary for all individuals within the company to have access to the firewall for their daily job duties.

As a government agency, our budget has been impacted by the current economic circumstances, which has resulted in a reduction in funding. Consequently, it would not be feasible to allocate additional resources toward increasing usage within the next year or two. Nonetheless, we will strive to maintain the current level of functionality and make any necessary updates to ensure a smooth operation.

I rate the scalability of WatchGuard Firebox a nine out of ten.

There is a time difference when I have tried to receive support causing some challenges.

I rate the support from WatchGuard Firebox a seven out of ten.

Neutral

We used Check Point previously.

The deployment took us a couple of hours and it was simple.

The deployment process for the WatchGuard Firebox in our department was a rather straightforward one given the size of our team. Being the head of the department and the sole person responsible for handling firewalls, I was in charge of conducting the entire process from start to finish. This involved a considerable amount of research to determine the most suitable option, followed by cost analysis to ensure that we were making the most cost-effective decision. Ultimately, I was responsible for making the selection, conducting the implementation, and overseeing the entire process, which required me to take on a multitude of tasks and responsibilities.

I rate the setup of WatchGuard Firebox an eight out of ten.

We did the deployment of the solution in-house.

We have seen an ROI from using the solution.

I rate the ROI of WatchGuard Firebox a nine out of ten.

Despite the fact that there is always room for improvement, the current pricing of the solution is still lower compared to its competitors.

I rate the price of the WatchGuard Firebox an eight out of ten.

We have evaluated SonicWall and Cisco, but the choice to choose WatchGuard Firebox was based on cost and reputation.

We use two people for the maintenance of the solution.

I would recommend it and tell them to try it. It is a cost-effective, reliable solution.

I rate WatchGuard Firebox a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of the Firebox mainly revolves around bandwidth management, unnecessary web blocking, application control, and protection against brute force attacks. It is also implemented for load balancing, SD-WAN, and branch-to-branch connectivity from one location to another. We also use it for securing access through VPN and enforcing network security policies.

The WatchGuard Firebox has helped in securing our network by implementing a strong firewall with various features like VPN support, gateway antivirus, and application control. It has aided in preventing brute force attacks and managing our bandwidth effectively.

Some of the most valuable features of the Firebox include web blocking, application control, protection against brute force attacks, load balancing, SD-WAN, and VPN support. These features help us manage and secure our network efficiently.

One area for improvement is the limitation in the product portfolio compared to competitors like Fortinet, which offers a broader portfolio including Authentication, VPNs, FortiMail, Sandbox, and Email Security. WatchGuard's focus on UTM solutions may not meet the needs of all enterprise customers.

We have been using the WatchGuard Firebox for approximately five years.

The stability of the WatchGuard Firebox can vary depending on the customer network environment. The performance and latency may differ from customer to customer and infrastructure to infrastructure.

The scalability of the Firebox depends on the specific model and the number of concurrent users it can support. Different models offer different VPN capacities and can be tailored to fit the needs of various sizes of organizations.

Customer service and support are not explicitly mentioned in terms of rating, but overall feedback seems positive.

Positive

I have previously used various solutions including CyberRooms, Sophos, Fortinet, SonicWall, and other competitors. We largely switched to WatchGuard to integrate their UTM solutions and later their acquired endpoint security portfolios.

The initial setup of the WatchGuard Firebox is straightforward and time-saving. It is designed to be user-friendly even for those with basic IT knowledge, making it easy to deploy and manage.

Implementation can be done by internal IT teams. WatchGuard also provides support for implementation, ensuring that the configurations are appropriately pushed as per the model and requirements.

WatchGuard offers cost-effective solutions, especially beneficial for economically-constrained customers. Pricing and discounts are deal-dependent and vary based on customer requirements.

We evaluated multiple products, including Fortinet, SonicWall, Sophos, CyberRooms, and various others in the market.

To maintain the efficacy of the Firebox, it is crucial to renew the subscription to get security updates and additional support features. Ensuring the subscription is up-to-date is necessary for ongoing product support.

The solution controls who can connect to the Internet and who cannot and which protocols and services are allowed to pass through. It manages VPNs, including back-office VPNs. It also provides web-blocking features for users who want to restrict access to certain types of content.

Compared to competitors in the same segments, WatchGuard Firebox is an excellent firewall to implement.

WatchGuard Firebox offers DNS protection along with geofencing features. Additionally, the SSL VPN combined with multifactor authentication is excellent and a standout feature. 

The product is expensive. The pricing could be improved.

WatchGuard Firebox offers various models, each designed to meet different needs. While it's true that the models share many features, consolidating the lineup into fewer models could be beneficial. For example, they could have distinct models for small, medium, and large enterprises, each capable of scaling according to the number of users or throughput requirements. This approach would streamline their offerings, making it easier for customers to choose the right Firebox for their needs.

I have been using WatchGuard Firebox for 25 years.

The solution is very stable. I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

The solution’s scalability is good. 20 customers are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

WatchGuard support is highly effective. They maintain an excellent support and help desk service.

Positive

Once, I had to connect with a Cisco device on the remote side, which also went smoothly. It was between a customer and a third-party firm conducting business with my customer. They needed to establish a connection to their Cisco Firewall, and the implementation process was as smooth as setting up the back-end VPN.

The initial setup is straightforward. A simple installation for a small business takes about four to six hours. One IT guy is enough for the deployment.

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

The solution is transparent and easy to set up and maintain. 

WatchGuard Firebox has always been very effective for many customers who use Firebox to connect their remote sites. Additionally, many customers log in to a Firebox using the WatchGuard Mobile VPN with multi-factor authentication. This setup has proven to be very stable, high quality, and easy to configure.

Customers find WatchGuard Firebox to be an expensive solution, but some of them recognize its necessity. However, some customers initially fail to see the need for a firewall. Yet, when it comes time for renewal, after a year or three, they begin to understand its importance, often aided by a chart explaining its benefits. Just like a car requiring periodic servicing, a firewall also necessitates attention.

I recommend WatchGuard Firebox to others because it's a very good product. Firstly, it boasts numerous nice features. It's straightforward to implement, maintain, and understand. One particularly appealing feature is the real-time traffic monitoring.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the product for added security layers, allowing us to control and manage our network traffic effectively.

The product's most valuable feature is DNS filtering, which blocks users from accessing unwanted websites.

The product's technical support services need improvement. 

We have been using WatchGuard Firebox for a few years.

We never encountered stability issues. The system never went offline.

I rate the platform’s stability an eight out of ten.

The technical support team takes time to respond.

Positive

We did use a different solution previously. We switched to WatchGuard Firebox because it offered added security features. 

While your supplier assisted with most of the setup, it still took some time to become accustomed to using the product effectively. The installation process spanned about two days, with the first day focused on physical installation and the second day dedicated to configurations. Beforehand, your provider inquired about your existing services, such as multiple Internet providers and virtual networks, to ensure seamless integration with the WatchGuard Firebox.

We took help from a third-party consultant for product implementation. Additionally, there were four staff members from our organization involved in the process.

As per my knowledge, the product is more affordable than alternatives like Barracuda, which was reported to be way more expensive. However, I wasn't involved in the detailed discussions about these aspects, so I can't provide more in-depth insights. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.

Before choosing WatchGuard Firebox, we evaluated other options. Some of the alternatives we considered included Norton and Barracuda. However, Barracuda was ultimately deemed to be out of our price range. Norton was also considered but not chosen, partly due to pricing concerns. Ultimately, a partner highly recommended WatchGuard, which influenced our decision to select it as our security solution.

In our environment, we've deployed the WatchGuard Firebox primarily to secure remote access for users. Previously, we relied on remote desktops, but due to security concerns, we transitioned everything to VPN connections facilitated by the Firebox.

Initially, the ease of management and configuration of the Firebox for administrators was around four. However, as we became more familiar with the technical details and how to use it, that rating increased to an eight.

Firebox operates effectively in the background, blocking potential threats without a need for constant monitoring. It allows us to focus on other tasks knowing that our network is protected. As for ROI, it's challenging to provide specific metrics without detailed analysis, but overall, the enhanced security by the Firebox justifies the investment.

I rate it a nine out of ten.

We primarily use WatchGuard Firebox for security and connections. It's a web and endpoint, and we have different connections to associates and customers through internal networks, which is a big part of it.

The performance has been satisfactory for all of them, and I appreciate how it simplifies configuration. While it does require a certain configuration process, once completed, it works seamlessly. Personally, I find the ease of configuration to be the most valuable aspect of this product.

We're primarily using the on-prem version, but we do use the cloud-based version a little bit as well. When I was with my previous company, we had many customers with WatchGuard devices, and the cloud-based services were quite good. One feature that I really liked was the ability to configure settings and push them straight to the cloud, which made it easier to distribute them to different firewalls.

One thing, which I have been finding a bit annoying, is that it's too dependent on the Windows operating system. The configuration systems and software required to access WatchGuard always run on the Windows system. As my workstation is Linux, I need to have access to Windows to use WatchGuard. It's a little inconvenient for me, but it's not a big issue. For me, that's the most annoying thing, and I would like it to be more Linux-friendly.

In the next release, I would like to see better software and configuration systems that could also be used on Linux.

I've been using it for about ten years. We are using the latest version of WatchGuard Firebox.

It's been a rock-solid solution with no issues. I would rate it a ten out of ten. The WatchGuard Firebox has been a reliable and stable solution for us. Only once in the ten-year period did we experience some issues with the product, but practically never any issues with the solution.

It is a scalable solution. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Overall, there are around 50 to 70 users using WatchGuard Firebox in our local office. There are also people using this solution in our head office in other countries.

The customer service and support team was good.

Positive

I have used some SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) products and some Cisco products. But very little. Because most of the time, I use WatchGuard Firebox.

In the beginning, around ten years ago, it was a little bit challenging. However, the support was excellent in Finland, where I am located. The team who worked there provided good courses, and now, everything else is much more straightforward to install than before.

They are so easy to configure, from the littlest firewall to the biggest one. That's very good cohesion in the whole lineup of devices. It's easy to change the model if you need more performance, and you can easily change the hardware. From the very small five boxes to the bigger ones, it's easy to change the model if you need more performance. When you purchase the WatchGuard Firebox, you usually get the software with the option that the new hardware comes with.

course, it takes longer if you want to modify everything to ensure that your email gateway is working as it should and your VPN tunnels are set up properly. However, it's still very fast. So, I just quickly put the network cables in, and it starts working. But, of course, it's important to get everything working correctly, which takes some time, not because of the WatchGuard Firebox, but because you need to put every server you'll be using in working order and ensure that everything is working well with the firewall. It takes time. But once everything is set up, it's good to go.

In a new installation, it will always take time to get everything working as desired. There will always be something that needs to be done and different things you may want to enhance. But, with WatchGuard Firebox, you can get it working very quickly and then modify everything later.

Usually, we have two people for maintenance because there are usually other things happening at the same time. When we know that we need to do something bigger for the firewall, we exchange the hardware for a better or newer one or do software updates. The big picture of software updates is made in stock. So usually, one guy maintains the firewall, another update the servers, and they oversee the maintenance and anything else that needs to be done. The job role of the maintenance team is IT administrator.

We usually keep up with the support subscriptions and usually make a three-year contract or buy a 3-year subscription. And then, it's time to update the hardware at the same time. Our size of the firewall has been from €5,000 to €7,000. I don't exactly remember the price, but that size of hardware was what we needed.

I would definitely recommend using WatchGuard Firebox. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I used to use it for different customers; however, now I use it for one site. We primarily use the solution for application control. It's to block applications we don't want users to use. 

We like the blocking capabilities on offer. 

I like the brand, and I know the product really well, which is what keeps me using it. I have a good knowledge of the solution. 

It is stable and reliable.

The solution can scale well.

Technical support has been helpful. 

We have witnessed an ROI as it has helped with security measures. 

The solution does what it does. I don't notice any real shortcomings.

The licensing can be a bit expensive. 

We just started using the solution again. I've probably used it for six or seven years. 

The stability is very good. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

I'd rate the product ten out of ten in terms of reliability. 

We have around 400 users on the solution currently. Pretty much everyone uses it, including IT, care workers, nurses, et cetera.

It's scalable. I'd rate it nine out of ten in terms of scalability. 

Technical support is good. They are helpful and responsive. 

Positive

I did not previously use a different solution. 

The solution is deployed on-site. However, we use the cloud to look at everything.

The solution is pretty easy to set up. 

It took me about an hour to set up the solution. 

I handled the setup myself. It was simple, as I've worked with it for a while. I didn't need any outside assistance. 

We have witnessed an ROI as it has helped us secure all of our sites. 

The solution is a bit pricey. We'd like the price lowered a bit. 

We pay every three years for a license.

It's comparable to other firewalls. One of the downsides is that, after three years, there are some extra expenses for new hardware. 

We are customers and end-users.

I am using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Our company used the solution for endpoint detection response. 

When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly. It is a nice feature that any EDR should do. 

The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup. 

I used the solution for four months at my previous employer. 

The solution is quite stable with no observed issues. 

The scalability is not an issue because you just add more licenses as you get more endpoints. 

I used the solution at my previous employer but use other EDR solutions at my current employer. 

There were some complications with the setup that I have not experienced with other EDR solutions. 

We worked with a third party because some devices would not accept the solution and we wanted someone there to help us troubleshoot. You're supposed to be able to deploy from the cloud but we had to physically double check that the solution installed on each device.

Two members of our team handled the deployment process with a third party representative. We experienced some issues along the way such as devices not accepting the solution. 

There should have been a better method for deployment and it took a long time. It is unclear if the issue was with our vendor or the solution, but the process wasn't very nice. 

The solution is a bit more expensive than other options. 

A license costs around $180 for a three-year commitment. For comparison, Microsoft Defender costs $164 over three years but you are only locked into a one-year commitment. 

There isn't anything revolutionary about the solution's technology. It does what other EDR's do. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is a primary firewall.

The features I found most valuable are probably the built-in VPN functionality and the scalability because they can both be centrally managed. It is very easy to scale. It is also very granular, so you can be as restrictive or as non-restrictive as you like. This means you can be very precise with it.

The area where I think this product can be improved is the user interface and the reporting. It can be quite difficult to find the correct logs and to actually find out what is going on. The digging can be time-consuming.

I have been using this solution for a year now.

I would rate the stability of this solution an eight out of 10, with one being unstable and 10 being very stable.

I would rate the scalability of this solution a 10, on a scale of one to 10, with one being not scalable at all and 10 being very scalable.

We currently have about 200 users.

From my experience with their customer service team, I would say that they seem quite knowledgeable and fairly quick to respond.

Previously, we used FortiGate. FortiGate is a much more mature product. I feel like FortiGate is a lot easier to work with. Firebox, you're able to achieve the same outcomes, but it can be a lot more complicated to do so.

The initial setup can be somewhat complex. I would rate it a six out of 10, with one being not complicated at all and 10 being very complex.

Our deployment was done through a third party.

I would rate their pricing plan a four, which means it's definitely on the cheaper scale.

I would recommend this product, but you need to make sure that you've got the technical capability to work with it because it can be quite complicated. Overall, I would rate this solution a seven out of 10, with one being poor and 10 being excellent.