Pi-hole vs. Sophos Web Content Filtering

Before Sophos, I would receive scammers regarding tradeshow lists. People wanted me to pay for lists, but these people weren't actually from the tradeshows. I can now block those, and have received much fewer of those scams. I am also able to open emails within quarantine to view them before deleting, releasing, allowing, or blocking. I use this to my advantage, and am able to make better decisions on what to do with the emails.

Incentivized

• Sophos does an excellent job of category-based content filtering. It's easy to configure and flexible for many environments with the ability to tighten or loosen restrictions as requirements determing.
• Sophos' built-in capabilites can force safe search rules to protect against content work-arounds like Image search and search engines in general.
• The Sophos XTreme architecture also helps improve the overall performance of the Web Content Filtering solution. It is very quick and very transparent when in use on the network.

Incentivized

• It only allows UTF-8 encoded characters.
• It does not support metadata.
• It does not support comments in the custom filter file.

Incentivized

Sophos has been a much easier product to configure and eventually manage, with preset rules and policies to start off right out of the box, saving administrators time from adding every category and or site. However you can add/import all know good company sites (internal url's) as well as local sites for a safer settings. (know sites)

Incentivized

• Super positive impact, the Sandstorming Add On, it increases protection at it's maximum level (for new or existent/variant threats).
• Customers often have the need of a system capable of report everything that the network is being handed, Sophos Web Content Filtering achieves this.
• The ROI is very fast since top management quickly see results on filtering and reporting of what is really going on within their networks.

Incentivized