CheckPoint vs. Sophos Firewall

CheckPoint performs well as an internal firewall between network zones, providing policy control and deep inspection of internal traffic. It works well for a multi network setup like ours across multiple sites. It is however not a fast changing interface and time needs to be taken to perform changes. It's not a quick as other vendors

Incentivized

It is well-suited for small, medium, and large organizations looking for comprehensive cybersecurity protection. It will not only safeguard their network from cyberattacks but also provide them with many advanced features like deep packet inspection, centralized management, web filtering, application control, etc. in one place. It will help them optimize bandwidth and ensure continued connectivity.

Incentivized

• Threat Prevention better than Fortinet
• Granularity of security policy can be customized to the maximum
• hardware performance is really good
• Bugs are less as compared to other vendors
• support is excellent
• modules work as expected
• Features can achieve out of box requirements

Incentivized

• Web filtering. This allows us to monitor web usage and block certain categories from being access at the perimeter.
• Application Control. With application control we can block certain applications that get categorized from working accessing the Internet.
• Synchronized Security. When utilizing the Sophos Endpoint product you can use Synchronized Security to minimize Lateral Movement in a network. If a machine is shows a Red status you can auto-isolate it and it is unable to communicate with anything else on the network.

Incentivized

• In my experience, notifications are completely broken and non-functional
• In my opinion, confusing UX for the cloud portal
• Don't try and import 100's of endpoints when onboarding because it will create a mess
• When installing the CP client you have to remove Microsoft Defender and if that fails, CheckPoint technical support goes, "Not my problem, sucks to be you!"

Incentivized

• If using Endpoint security and the Firewall it would be nice to have an easier back and forth between the portals rather than have two separate tabs open. Especially if using more than one in multiple locations.
• If dealing with different revisions options are moved around and sometimes in places that doesn't normally seem like they should be there.

Incentivized

Every dollar to CheckPoint is a wasted dollar.

Incentivized

the solution offer the most improvement about the usability by management more firewall in the same context or multicontext instead. The shared database allow to use one object for more than a package target of a cluster or more of gateways firewall. The management remain isolated from traffic pass through the firewall so the disruption is limited at minimum.

Incentivized

Because this is a user-friendly interface, and anyone can use it there are multiple articles and guidelines available, it has advanced-level security features. they provide VPN solutions all the features are very practical, SSID MAC-based authentications web control, Firewall rules segregation of the rules and policies, On-premises Active directory single sign-on feature is also available.

As we are all addicted to graphics-oriented interfaces for all our life products. Easy to manage and access as a good way of using anything

The CheckPoint Firewall and Cisco ISR router serve different purposes. Our organisation uses both devices, but in different areas of the topology. The Cisco ISR is a remote device and its function is to relay information to our edge firewall, which then passes to our internal firewall (CheckPoint) to securely control traffic requests.

Incentivized

I was a big fan of Cisco ASA products, but when I saw all of the security feature differences between both firewalls, I moved to Sophos devices. Its sandbox, IPS, and many more features are really advanced. Cisco does not provide features like this.

Incentivized

• Smart console with lower operational overhead
• Compliance with Hipaa, PCISSS and saving on compliance plenties
• Less compatibility issues
• licensing model is costlier at the beginning
• Some modules require special training
• False positives may occur

Incentivized

• True UTM device.
• Very Active customer help for any help.
• Easy license and cost effective.
• Should [do] more work on logging and reporting.