We performed a comparison between Netgate pfSense and Sophos Cyberoam UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Secure, user-friendly, stable, and scalable network security solution. Installation is straightforward."
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"I appreciate FortiGate's flexibility, which allows for centralized management through FortiManager."
"It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"FortiGate firewalls are easy to manage through a user-friendly web interface. They also have advanced features like DDoS and DLP. However, I wouldn't recommend enabling all of these features on one device because it can cause performance issues."
"A strong point of FortiGate is the graphical interface is complete and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is load balancing. It can provide central management and VPNA. Additionally, it has enhanced our security environment."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security."
"Improved service performance and availability through redundancy."
"I handle the scanning for the finance department. I recently encountered an issue with the PCL bills, our company bills. I resolved the matter, cleared the bill, and received calls regarding it using pfsense.The user interface is extremely user-friendly, which is why we use it across various plant sites. Our IT representatives at the plants find it easy to use and manage because of its straightforward interface."
"Super easy to manage. Anyone who has been working with firewalls can handle it."
"The documentation is very good."
"I have found the most valuable features to be antivirus and malware protection."
"The solution has good customization abilities and plenty of features."
"The solution is very easy to use and has a very nice GUI."
"I find Sophos Cyberoam UTM very good. I like the feature of being able to block off Mac IDs that host users. For example, you have a Mac or Windows laptop and you created a hotspot. Other devices like mobiles and tablets e.g. iPads connected to that hotspot. We can block those devices that connected to the hotspot we created, only through Sophos. It's a good feature we didn't find in other UTMs."
"I like the SSL VPN connection. Cyberoam works well for controlling users and authenticating their connection to the internet."
"The most valuable feature is the solution is easy to configure for users."
"The main features I have found best are the load balancer and ease of use."
"The solution is easy to integrate."
"User and network policies to be managed on a single screen with powerful filtering and search options."
"The best feature is the flexibility the product offers, in terms of remote access. What we had before was a decentralized mechanism in our organization, but after having this product we were able to get the remote locations into the same LAN. We were able to control the bandwidth and were able to take virtual access of those machines and give them the support, as and when required."
"The product is a simple and user-friendly UTM that can handle accounting, reporting, firewall, IPS, and antivirus for industries."
"It would be ideal if they had some sort of GUI interface for troubleshooting and diagnostics."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"Currently, FortiGate is providing SSL VPN. But they're missing some features that are available in Palo Alto's SSL VPN."
"The cloud management and automation capability could be improved."
"The reporting in Fortinet FortiGate could improve. Customers are having to purchase additional reporting components. When I have used the Sophos solution it is a complete solution, in Fortinet FortiGate you have to use additional tools to have the features needed."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiGate should improve the VPN tokens."
"The visibility of the network can be better. The GUI can be improved for better visibility of the network flow. Other solutions have better GUI in terms of network visibility."
"pfSense could improve by having a sandboxing feature that I have seen in SonicWall. However, maybe it is available I am not aware of it."
"We are at the moment looking to use it as a proxy service so that we can limit what websites people go and view and that sort of thing. That's an area I've struggled with a little bit at the moment and it could be a bit easier to set up."
"It should integrate with LDAP, Active Directory, etc, to improve the way in which the traces and connections of each IP, or user connected through the firewall, are shown."
"Their support could be better in terms of the response time."
"Also, the GUI is helpful, but it's not user-friendly. It's complicated. It should be more intuitive for the average user and have an excellent graphical view. Of course, the user will typically know about network administration, but it still should be easy to understand."
"The GUI could use more “bells and whistles”. It's got plenty of info for a Sysadmin but some people like shiny things."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"The solution could use better reporting. They need to offer more of it in general. Right now, the graphics aren't the best. If you need to provide a report to a manager, for example, it doesn't look great. They need to make it easier to understand and give users the ability to customize them."
"The policy is a bit too vague."
"The reporting part could be more user-friendly for troubleshooting and identifying network issues. It should be more easy for a normal user to identify the problem in their network."
"There needs to be more documentation that users can access to help them understand the solution or troubleshoot as necessary."
"The solution is at its end of life and some of the appliances are finishing."
"I don't know whether this will be included in an upgrade, but I would like to get the user utility, like seeing where the users are using more of the data."
"Network visibility is an area in the solution with shortcomings where improvements can be made."
"Sophos Cyberoam UTM has room for improvement in specific rules-based objects and redesign. The solution also needs to improve in adding rules and policies, including renewing and finding policies."
"Cyberoam UTM needs to have more certifications with third-parties, such as NSS Labs."
Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 7th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos UTM, SonicWall NSa and Sophos XG. See our Netgate pfSense vs. Sophos Cyberoam UTM report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
