We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Firewall 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."This product is definitely scalable."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"It's a user-friendly firewall. Most of the tasks are very simple. It's simple to configure and troubleshoot this firewall."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The ease of setting the solution up is a valuable aspect for us."
"Mainly the FortiGate reporting system is very good. It guides us through all the expectations of security. Fortinet provides us all that we need for security. Also, Fortinet FortiGate is a next-generation firewall. It is much more advanced than others."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"Fortigate is very scalable to serve our customers' needs. We have scaled already from fifty to more than a hundred instances of Fortinet FortiGate. Around 20 staff are required for deployment and maintenance, mostly engineers."
"You can also put everything into a nice, neat, little package, as far as configuration goes. I was formerly a command-line guy with the ASA, and I was a little nervous about dealing with a GUI interface versus a command line, but after I did my first deployment, I got a lot more comfortable with doing it GUI based."
"My confidence continues to build upon using Cisco firewalls."
"All the features except IPS are valuable. IPS is not a part of my job."
"In v9.8 you are able to do active/backup HA with ASAv (Adaptive Security Virtual Appliance) deployed on MS Azure."
"Management Console and user profiling to define activities."
"REST API offering with rich capabilities which makes the product very robust."
"The most valuable feature would be ASDM. The ability to go in, visualize and see the world base in a clear and consistent manner is very powerful."
"If configured, Firepower provides us with application visibility and control."
"I'm more inclined towards the conventional firewall. So for me, I'm more geared towards the standard firewall type functionalities as well as the web application firewall because that seems to work fine."
"Having a firewall solution with a data quota is very important when the bandwidth is limited, which really distinguishes it from other products."
"We consider the user level and control features of Sophos Cyberoam UTM to be the best."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Our customers find it economical and offers good security. These two features are key. Ease of installation and implementation are also key factors."
"It is very easy to use."
"The solution is excellent for web and application filtering and remote access with the VPN."
"You can geofence yourself if there is an incoming attack or a continuous ping from a company outside your country."
"There are just some services that aren't available. For example, the Ethernet or point-to-point protocols. They could add these services to their product offering - especially services for ISPs."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"The firewall engine is not so strong as of now, in my opinion... My second concern is that, while they have Zero-day vulnerability and anti-malware features, the threat engine needs to be strengthened, its efficiency can be increased."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"When we cluster the two Fortinet FortiGate boxes together we have some issues."
"One area that could be improved is its logging functionality. Your logs are usually displayed on the screen, but if you want to go back one or two days, then you need another solution in place because those logs are overwritten within minutes."
"One of the problems that we have had is the solution requires Java to work. This has caused some problems with the application visibility and control. When the Java works, it is good, but Java wasn't a good choice. I don't like the Java implementation. It can be difficult to work with sometimes."
"I was just trying to learn how this product actually operates and one thing that I see from internal processing is it does fire-walling and then sends it to the IPS model and any other model that needs to be performed. For example, content checking or filtering will be done in a field processing manner. That is something that causes delays in the network, from a security perspective. That is something that can be improved upon. Palo Alto already has implemented this as a pilot passed processing. So they put the same stream of data across multiple modules at the same time and see if it is giving a positive result by using an XR function. So, something similar can be done in the Cisco Firepower. Instead of single processing or in a sequential manner, they can do something similar to pile processing. Internal function that is something that they can improve upon."
"On firewall features, Fortinet is better. Cisco needs to become more competitive and add more features or meet Fortinet's offering."
"With the new FTD, there is a little bit of a learning curve."
"Multiple WAN connections: Even though you can implement more than one interface to outside connections, it is lacking on load balances, etc."
"UTM features would be nice or some NextGen features."
"Some of the features, like the stability, need to be improved."
"In my experience the solution can be easier to configure with more documentation, we need more training."
"The configuration requires an expert to be set up, so it could be made simpler."
"Hence, it needs to be easier to configure rules using the solution."
"The setup is a bit complex, so we needed help from a consultant."
"The blocking needs to be improved."
"The documentation is not straightforward."
"The product had a hang issue. We needed to reboot, recreate the image, and reconfigure the previous image because the product hanged frequently."
"The solution's pricing could be a problem for some small businesses."
Cisco Secure Firewall is ranked 4th in Firewalls with 404 reviews while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is ranked 9th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 81 reviews. Cisco Secure Firewall is rated 8.2, while Sophos Cyberoam UTM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Firewall writes "Highlights and helps us catch Zero-day vulnerabilities traveling across our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Cyberoam UTM writes "Stable and has a straightforward setup; reporting is fast and easy". Cisco Secure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas Sophos Cyberoam UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos UTM, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos XG and OPNsense. See our Cisco Secure Firewall 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.
