We have an ERP that's in-house, and we use Sophos XG to generate a VPN client file, import it, and utilize the connectivity with low latency. This allows us to access our office systems remotely using the Sophos XG connection.

Sophos XG has allowed us to implement all kinds of firewall rules and manage bandwidth efficiently. By prioritizing bandwidth for our ERP hosted in Amazon Cloud and de-prioritizing non-essential sites, it has greatly improved our network management. The user interface is easy to navigate, making administration tasks straightforward. In terms of backup, reinstallation, and DHCP configuration, Sophos XG is very straightforward compared to other solutions.

The knowledge base needs improvement, particularly in terms of community support and training videos on platforms like YouTube. Compared to other firewalls, Sophos XG documentation is somewhat confusing and can be difficult to use. The licensing model could also be improved to cater to smaller offices, as the current minimum purchase is for 50 users, which can be expensive. Incorporating AI technology for enhanced learning and easier configurations would make the solution more robust.

I have been using Sophos XG since they took over Cyberoam, and I switched from Cyberoam to Sophos XG.

Sophos XG is very stable, even when serving as a DHCP server. Unlike some other firewalls, it does not overheat when certain features are enabled.

Our experience with customer service is excellent. We are supported by the guys who resell Sophos XG, and their technical team is well-trained and knowledgeable.

Positive

I have worked with FortiGate and Palo Alto. However, we switched to Sophos XG because FortiGate was expensive.

The setup process for Sophos XG is very straightforward, especially when compared to other firewalls.

We were supported by our reseller's technical team, who were well-trained and knowledgeable.

The Sophos XG costs about $1,300 annually for a license for up to 50 people. Comparatively, FortiGate offers similar features and IPsec for $1,600 annually.

I evaluated FortiGate and Palo Alto before choosing Sophos XG.

I rate Sophos XG a seven out of ten. Incorporating AI technology for enhanced configurations would improve its overall value.

I use Sophos XG as a channel partner, providing it to our customers for next-generation firewall solutions, Wi-Fi access points, and other security features. My customers include industries such as banking, manufacturing, IT, hospitals, and healthcare.

I regard Sophos XG as a superior choice among firewalls due to its advanced security, user manual, and control panel features, among others. The firewall offers effective policy management, bandwidth management, and group policy features from a sales perspective. 

Additionally, customer support is highly regarded, with a technical representative swiftly addressing customer queries through the Sophos partner portal.

Sophos XG is reaching its end-of-life and end-of-support; therefore, the user count limitation of particular models should be improved.

I have been working with Sophos XG for around five to six years.

I would rate the stability of Sophos XG as ten out of ten.

I rate scalability as ten out of ten, indicating that it is easy to scale up for a larger number of users.

The technical support from Sophos XG is excellent. When my customers raise a ticket, a customer representative calls them immediately to address their queries. I rate customer service nine out of ten.

Positive

The setup process is easy and I would rate it ten out of ten.

My customers see a return on investment and value for money with Sophos XG.

I consider the pricing reasonable; it depends on the model and license type, like one-year, two-year, or five-year licenses. Compared to other firewalls like Fortigate, SonicWall, and Palo Alto, I find Sophos XG cost-effective. 

I highly recommend using Sophos XG for enhanced security purposes and organizational structure implementation. Furthermore, I rate Sophos XG as ten out of ten.

We primarily use Sophos XG as edge routers and edge firewalls, also known as border firewalls. We configure rules where specific users are allowed internet access and use rules for policy routing. We also control traffic for specific services, such as directing emails to one service provider while normal internet usage goes to another.

Sophos XG has helped us reduce virus and malware attacks. This allows our IT team to spend less time on troubleshooting and more on productive work. The ability to control what comes into and goes out of the network improves overall efficiency.

Sophos XG's most effective features for threat detection and management are its UTM components, which are useful for malware prevention and intrusion detection.

The firewall could be made more robust, particularly by simplifying two-factor authentication. It should also improve SD WAN capabilities. Additionally, there are issues with site-to-site VPNs dropping connections, which can be frustrating.

We have been using the solution since 2018.

Stability is generally okay. Customers have used the equipment all the way to end of life without major issues.

Scalability is not very flexible. You can't upgrade memory or storage on a specific model, which limits scalability.

The quality of support varies. The team handling application control is very good, but we have had bad experiences with the VPN support team. It all depends on the specific team you are dealing with.

Neutral

The setup is user-friendly and quite straightforward, especially for basic configurations.

Sophos XG reduces virus and malware attacks, addressing network efficiency and cost savings indirectly by minimizing the time spent on troubleshooting.

Pricing is reasonable. You get a perpetual license. That said, you must pay for support and updates. The cost depends on the package you are in, such as full threat management or basic.

We have also worked with Fortinet Firewalls and Palo Alto. Price-wise, Sophos XG is reasonable when comparing similar models.

When recommending Sophos, we consider the customer's specific requirements and infrastructure compatibility. Sophos is user-friendly and suitable for environments without highly technical staff because it is easy to manage.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The primary use case for Sophos XG is basic firewalling and configuration. We use it primarily for installation purposes.

Time-saving and cost-saving benefits are realized, with stability contributing to these advantages. It provides approximately 10% to 15% savings in time and costs.

The most valuable features of Sophos XG include having rules and policies as a firewall. It is easy to configure.

The areas needing improvement are support and configuration. The delays in technical support can be handled better. Sometimes, configuration gives some issues.

I have been using Sophos XG for almost one year.

No hardware or software solution is 100% stable. I would rate it at about 99% accuracy.

Sophos XG has excellent scalability features. It is already available on cloud as well as on-premises, and you can scale up to multiple firewalls with centralized management. No limitations have been faced regarding scalability.

Customer service and support can be improved as there are delays. I would rate the support at eight out of ten.

Positive

Sophos XG is easy to install, generally requiring one person and takes about two to three hours depending on the rules and policies.

One person is usually sufficient for installation unless multiple dynamics are involved.

The return on investment is judged to be around three point five out of five in terms of stability, time saving, and cost saving.

The solution is considered cheap in terms of pricing.

For small and midsize enterprises, Sophos XG is a good choice without any major issues.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Sophos XG firewall primarily for threat management, including firewall and endpoint equipment protection. We are in the process of upgrading to Sophos XG 33 firewall.

Sophos has greatly improved our network's security posture. In terms of network security and user activity reporting, it has helped us to manage and analyze the activities of the users. From the reporting, we can now see areas where we need improvements, such as blocking certain sites from users.

The most valuable features are its protection capabilities like threat prevention, malware security, web protection, and web security. The security features are very good.

There should be a workaround in case of equipment breakdown, like a stopgap measure while the equipment is being returned or replaced. An improvement in the product's pricing would also be beneficial so that more people can afford it.

We have been using Sophos XG since 2018.

Sophos' technical support is very prompt and efficient. For instance, when our equipment failed to reboot, their team was quick to diagnose and resolve the problem by exchanging the equipment within two weeks.

Positive

We used another firewall before Sophos.

Having a Unified Threat Management system like Sophos XG has helped us spend less on network security, thus providing a good return on investment by managing our income effectively.

The price is reasonable, but if reduced, it could become accessible to more people. Currently, it costs about four million shillings in Kenya.

Before using Sophos, we used another firewall.

Regular prompts from Sophos to the users for instant reporting of any challenges would be very beneficial. Including more YouTube videos, webinars, and other educational content would also help users understand and utilize the product more effectively.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Actually, we are using Tekton for creating CI/CD pipelines for building and deploying applications to different environments.

It helped a lot in terms of automation. We sometimes use Tekton for purposes like sending emails, running batch jobs, and similar tasks.

The valuable features include cloud-native integration, which makes it highly available and efficient in modern containerized environments. Another feature is the modular pipeline that allows reusing CI/CD manifests for different purposes. This modularity helps in reducing redundancy and maintaining a streamlined process.

One area of improvement is the lack of cross-cluster capability, meaning you need different sets of tasks and pipelines for each Kubernetes cluster. Tekton also has an unstable API with frequent changes, making it challenging to maintain consistency across versions. Additionally, there's a need for a better dashboard and built-in authentication mechanisms.

It's about one and a half years we have been working with Tekton.

Tekton is quite stable when used in a well-established Kubernetes cluster. The stability largely depends on the stability of the Kubernetes environment itself, which is designed for high availability.

Tekton's scalability is one of its most advanced features. Since it uses the underlying Kubernetes infrastructure, it can scale easily if the Kubernetes cluster is sufficiently large. I would rate it eight out of ten for scalability.

We primarily used community resources like Stack Overflow for addressing our issues and did not directly contact Tekton's customer service.

Positive

In my previous company, we used GitLab and Jenkins for creating CICD pipelines. Currently, Tekton is the primary tool we are using, with Jenkins as a backup solution if Tekton encounters any issues.

The initial setup was manageable but required extensive reading and understanding of documentation. If the Kubernetes cluster is already in place, the setup can be completed in less than ten minutes.

The deployment of Tekton was done in-house with a team of six to seven people handling deployment, creating CI/CD pipelines, and maintaining the solution.

Tekton is an open-source tool, meaning there are no setup costs associated with it. I would rate the cost at one, indicating it is free to use.

In my previous company, we used GitLab and Jenkins for similar purposes.

My advice is to avoid using Tekton if possible due to its complex setup and lack of user-friendly features like a comprehensive dashboard and built-in authentication mechanisms.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.