WatchGuard Firebox Cloud (Hourly)

My main use case for WatchGuard Firebox  is as a next-generation firewall solution and security solution, which is used for network security. Most of the network security aspects are covered through WatchGuard Firebox , including web filtering, gateway antivirus, VPN, DNS security, and advanced threat hunting in the network layer. I use WatchGuard Firebox primarily due to the unified threat management web application tool that provides comprehensive network security.

The best features WatchGuard Firebox offers include a very easy-to-use and user-friendly interface. It has a web interface through which we access it, integrating all the network security appliances into the portal, making management very simple. It works well with WatchGuard Cloud for centralized monitoring, and services such as Gateway Antivirus, APT Blocker, DNSWatch, and Web Blocker are included. Creating inbound or outbound policies is also very easy and user-friendly. The integration part is seamless, though it is more related to small industries or mid-scale industries and not applicable for large industries.

WatchGuard Firebox has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to manage uncovered loopholes that our SIEM  solution cannot completely monitor for network devices, sensors, switches, routers, or firewalls. All of this can be managed in one place using WatchGuard Firebox, demonstrating its positive impact.

In terms of improvement, I suggest that the integration part could be made a little more seamless or easier. While the management of interfaces is straightforward, certain advanced configurations can become complex in large deployments, as it mainly targets small to mid-cap industries. It could have been elaborated more to be applicable for larger organizations. Additionally, some improvements in threat intelligence integrations and SIEM  integration as an out-of-the-box context would be beneficial. Regarding user experience, customizing some dashboards for analysts reviewing alerts or logs would make it easier.

Integration with other tools could be made more visible for larger clients since the product targets small and mid-cap businesses. This would enable larger organizations to take advantage of it and provide more competition against market competitors such as Fortinet or Palo Alto.

I have been using WatchGuard Firebox for more than one and a half years, starting in 2015, and it is one of our customer's firewall security solutions.

WatchGuard Firebox is generally stable, although we experienced some downtime during upgrade times, but this is acceptable as many applications or vendors have similar situations during upgrades.

WatchGuard Firebox scales well with small and mid-sized businesses and can support growing organizations by upgrading appliance models or leveraging WatchGuard Cloud management. However, very large enterprise environments with complex multi-data center architectures or larger clients may benefit more from solutions offering extensive enterprise-grade features, which WatchGuard Firebox might not provide.

Customer support for WatchGuard Firebox has been helpful during the integration process when we received technical documents and support from their technical team. They were also supportive with firmware upgrades and regularly address vulnerabilities and improve functionalities.

I previously used Fortinet before switching to WatchGuard Firebox.

WatchGuard Firebox is deployed in my organization on a public cloud platform.

I have seen a return on investment after switching to WatchGuard Firebox, as a previous client using Fortinet was very happy with the move, saving money due to its design for small-case entities and realizing value for money after the switch.

Regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing for WatchGuard Firebox, it is very affordable, mainly focusing on small and mid-cap organizations. The affordability makes it a great option for small and mid-cap clients, and some added advantages can be acquired after taking a subscription for additional features.

Before choosing WatchGuard Firebox, I evaluated other options in the market, including Palo Alto Network and Fortinet, and found WatchGuard Firebox to be cheaper, more reliable, and of better value for money.

Specific outcomes I have seen since using WatchGuard Firebox include saving time, as during threat hunting activities, the red team had their activities, and we could not catch all the alerts or logs with our SIEM. Through this, we were able to catch all the logs, analyze them, and create relatable SIEM logs and rules to catch those alerts. We later integrated more logs from WatchGuard Firebox into the SIEM solution, Rapid7, which helped a lot in managing network logs.

The feature I rely on most day-to-day is centralized monitoring, so I do not need to navigate through multiple interfaces for various network applications. In one centralized monitoring, I have all the tools integrated, allowing me to block or allow or create any policies on behalf of all the network products. This is very helpful, mainly for the firewall application, as we can create any sort of firewall rules or perimeter rules to ensure our tenants are secured.

My advice for others looking into using WatchGuard Firebox is that if you are a small or mid-sized business entity looking for a complete network security solution, then you should consider WatchGuard Firebox. However, if you are a large client with a multi-cloud architecture or multi-region offices, it might be better to look for other solutions. For small to mid-level enterprises seeking value for money, WatchGuard Firebox is a one-stop solution for all network security needs.

Regarding WatchGuard Firebox's AI capabilities, I think it is a secure and reliable source, but it could have improved in governance and security, particularly in triggering alerts or reviewing policies from the logs it catches. While there is room for improvement, it is great compared to other SIEM solutions, as most logs we cannot find through SIEM could be obtained through WatchGuard Firebox. It helps us focus on network security and get more granular reports or logs, which is an added advantage, though some improvements in AI capabilities or traffic rules would be beneficial.

I would rate this review as a nine out of ten.

My main use case for WatchGuard Firebox  is modifying firewall rules and managing the entire university environment. A specific example of how I use WatchGuard Firebox  to modify rules or manage the university environment is allowing access from the outside to the internal servers.

I consider the best features that WatchGuard Firebox offers to be the security, flexibility, and strength it has as a firewall. Regarding the security, flexibility, and strength I mention, these features have benefited me in my daily work by having strong IDS protection, protection in terms of the EPDR antivirus platform with WatchGuard's cloud platform, and all the features the tool itself has.

WatchGuard Firebox has positively impacted my organization by providing a reliable and secure environment facing outward, and the ability to manage our internal rules. A concrete example of how that reliable and secure environment has improved the daily work or operations of the university is being able to identify attacks, with WatchGuard Firebox, the firewall, mitigating them has provided more security for the whole university.

The aspects I think could be improved in WatchGuard Firebox include the issue of licenses, as there is no equipment with large resources and the only way to do it is by having a virtual environment and then applying the license there.

I would like to elaborate more on the challenges I have encountered with the licensing system by saying that the license costs could be improved, as they are too high.

I have been working in my current field for two years.

I consider WatchGuard Firebox to be quite stable.

I rate the scalability of WatchGuard Firebox as quite scalable for the infrastructure we currently have.

My experience with WatchGuard Firebox's customer support is that they should have better communication channels.

Before implementing WatchGuard Firebox, I was using MikroTik.

The process of implementing the VPN for external users has been simple; there were no issues.

I have seen a return on investment with WatchGuard Firebox in terms of security.

My experience with the pricing, implementation costs, and licenses of WatchGuard Firebox was not good; there had to be many negotiations and we are still not satisfied with the licensing.

Before choosing WatchGuard Firebox, I evaluated other options, specifically Palo Alto.

My impression of WatchGuard Firebox's spam-blocking capabilities is that they are quite useful, especially the management of the EPDR or EPP of the antivirus platform, which is very effective.

I have noticed a significant reduction in bottlenecks in the systems after implementing WatchGuard Firebox, resulting in quite good performance improvements.

The high-speed ports in WatchGuard Firebox have helped maintain productivity during usage peaks in my organization by remaining stable, with no major issues regarding bandwidth, as it has been quite balanced.

The features of WatchGuard Firebox I consider most valuable for maintaining network security are the IDS and IPS protection for attacks, which are critical for attack mitigation.

My advice to other professionals who are considering using WatchGuard Firebox is that it is an interesting tool in terms of competitiveness with other technologies and it is very secure. I give this product an overall rating of eight out of ten.

We distributed WatchGuard Firebox  as a selling point for business-to-business solutions. We configure those Fireboxes for certain companies and provide technical support for companies who have problems configuring their Fireboxes.

We deployed WatchGuard Firebox  in various companies, including partner companies and government offices. When deploying WatchGuard Firebox, we ask the client or customer if they want us to configure it based on their current setup or if they do not have a certain Firebox yet. If we want to configure WatchGuard Firebox automatically when there are no Fireboxes present, but if there is an ongoing or another brand of Firebox, we certainly configure it the way the old one does. The transition from other brands or vendors' Fireboxes is not significantly different when it comes to deploying WatchGuard Firebox. Most likely, it is an easy deployment when it comes to WatchGuard Firebox.

I configured the endpoint security of WatchGuard Firebox. At the same time, I did not examine the access points for WatchGuard Firebox, so those are the three products that I handled for the company.

WatchGuard Firebox has a unified platform that allows you to easily go through each product of WatchGuard Firebox. For example, you have your two-factor authenticator, you have your Fireboxes, you have your endpoint security, and so on. Those four pillars or mostly the products of WatchGuard Firebox can be handled into one platform or one dashboard, and it is accessed through the cloud. When it comes to the user experience, WatchGuard Firebox is one of the good products out there considering its price.

WatchGuard Firebox has a user-friendly platform that is beginner-friendly, so you do not have to go with the CLI or the Command Line Interface. You just have to click the configuration right there on the dashboard, so you do not really have to have a background in the commands that you have for configuring WatchGuard Firebox itself. WatchGuard Firebox also has a good reputation when it comes to securing your network, for example, your network in your company. It has a different approach when it comes to its endpoint security, and it has many features, such as Zero Trust. A lot of things are right there in those Fireboxes, so I would say that it is user-friendly, and at the same time, if you want to go into detail with those configurations, you can still do so. It is user-friendly and good for those who want to really configure it in an advanced way.

WatchGuard Firebox does really simplify things a lot when it comes to configuration. You do not have to be on-site. For example, when configuring an off-site Firebox, such as a satellite office, you do not need to go right there; you just have to configure it on the premises of your office and then send WatchGuard Firebox to that off-site office. It is already configured there, and you just have to turn it on. This is a really simplified way of configuring things. At the same time, WatchGuard Firebox has good quarantine blocking of certain attacks. Right there and then, you can see what are the things that your team or the SOC, for us the cybersecurity team, what are the threats that are going on in our network. So it really simplifies things a lot for us.

WatchGuard Firebox has spam blocking features. We configure it out; most likely, you do have to configure certain settings when it comes to the protocol or the network protocols that you have there or the ports related to emails. WatchGuard Firebox has that feature, and it is a good feature when it comes to that Firebox.

A recommendation for using WatchGuard Firebox is to stick with what is secure. Some configurations are meant to lay low on the threat blocking, so just configure it with Zero Trust and be mindful of your configuration because it may have consequences when it comes to lowering the guard when using WatchGuard Firebox.

WatchGuard Firebox does have some features that need enhancement. The dashboard itself has an outdated appearance, just the looks of WatchGuard Firebox; it looks really outdated. But again, as long as it is working, it is still working. When it comes to the looks, the dashboard of WatchGuard Firebox needs some revamping or updating. Overall, I do not have any more needs for improvements for WatchGuard Firebox itself.

It has been a while since I configured one of their Fireboxes; going for a year already.

Most likely, I did not encounter any bottlenecks or errors or reductions in system performance after deploying WatchGuard Firebox. It has some limits, but I did not encounter any issues when it comes to WatchGuard Firebox itself.

None for my end for now.

WatchGuard Firebox does figure things out a little bit much easier when it comes to technical support. They do have features like hiring them or utilizing their service as a service, so they could provide you with a security operational center. They will be the ones to protect or configure your Fireboxes, and they will send you real-time reports. When it comes to technical support, WatchGuard Firebox is really out there when it comes to helping customers or end users or support itself.

The tech support of WatchGuard Firebox is 8 out of 10. It is because of the time; they operate on US time, so mostly when it comes here in the Philippines, it is a real bummer. But most likely, if your case is urgent, they will be the one to give you full-on support.

I did work with FortiNet and Sophos.

The price itself for WatchGuard Firebox varies. We are a business-to-business entity, so the price really depends on the understanding of WatchGuard Firebox plus the end user. We do have some government contracts for bidding, so I do not have a specific price for each Firebox.

Some pros of WatchGuard Firebox over FortiNet are the software or firmware used. FortiNet uses an open-source firmware, making the dashboard difficult to navigate because it looks outdated. At the same time, it is open-source rather than the proprietary software of WatchGuard, which is a US brand. The looks of WatchGuard Firebox have certain differences. The support itself from WatchGuard as a good US company provides excellent technical support, in contrast, FortiNet's technical support is lacking, so users often need to refer to forums and manuals, making it hard for them to solve their problems. Those are some pros and cons I see when comparing those two products.

We primarily distributed WatchGuard Firebox as a business-to-business solution. WatchGuard Firebox is deployed for various companies and government offices. The deployment is often straightforward, with options for either automatic configuration when no previous Fireboxes are present or mirroring the configuration of existing Fireboxes from alternative brands. An effortless transition when implementing WatchGuard Firebox is typically reported when replacing another brand. I would rate WatchGuard Firebox a 10 out of 10.

We are using WatchGuard Firebox  for network maintenance for one of our clients, and if any network outage happens, we troubleshoot the issue and try to fix it as soon as possible as per our SLA. We use the T80 model, which is one of the very good products for a mid-range firewall. I can see that this product is very good for medium-sized company deployments.

We actually did not deploy this firewall; we are only maintaining the network for this device.

Maintenance for WatchGuard Firebox  is not necessary on our end since it is installed in a client server office and we access it remotely. We only track alerts and investigate issues. It does not require much maintenance, provided the temperature in the server room is good. We only need to take care of the software or firmware upgrades as per the recommended version.

My favorite aspect is that its security capabilities are very good, with all-in-one security service capabilities including Intrusion Prevention System, IPS, Gateway Antivirus, Application Control , and Web Filtering. These are the security parameters this product has. Additionally, it has a VPN tunnel capacity for site-to-site VPN connectivity, which is also available for remote access users through SSL VPN  connection, making it very reliable for a hybrid work environment. Another plus point is the centralized management; we access the GUI version, which is very simple and easy to use, not complex at all. It integrates with WatchGuard Cloud Manager, which simplifies the configuration and monitoring system, making it very useful for me as a NOC engineer handling our client side. Furthermore, as hardware, it has multiple Gigabit interfaces and good throughput for SMB traffic loads, and in my experience, the hardware reliability is very stable with a limited number of failures.

While the GUI version we are using is good, it still needs some upgrades compared to leader companies or firewall models like Palo Alto or FortiGate. The navigation system could also be improved; it needs a better navigation system. The only dependence I see is the license dependency, as it has an active license bundle and without a license, the features are very limited. These are the minus points.

I have not yet experienced a reduction in system bottlenecks after deploying WatchGuard Firebox.

I have been using this solution for around ten months.

I can confidently say that it is very stable; no lagging, crashing, or any sort of instability has occurred.

It is scalable, suitable for SMB offices, branch deployments, or even retail chains and distributed networks, but it is not much suitable for large enterprise networks. Therefore, companies tend to prefer Palo Alto and FortiGate more than this firewall, and I believe the company needs to focus on scalability.

I had contacted technical support one time.

The speed and quality of the support are very good.

The quality is indeed good; they are very supportive and resolve issues within a specific timeline, such as within SLA. In my case, it was resolved within one day, so I rate it as nine out of ten.

It is easy to deploy. We have been using it for the last ten months, and during deployment, I did not notice any issues or problems faced by the deployment team.

The initial deployment took almost three hours.

In terms of pricing, I can rate it as eight out of ten since it offers good value for money.

We use alternatives such as SonicWall firewall, and we also consider Palo Alto, which is one of the leaders, as well as FortiGate and Meraki. Additionally, we have used Cisco ASA  firewall.

Currently, in my opinion, Palo Alto is one of the best firewalls I am using due to its features, user-friendliness, overall tech support, and the very good features it offers. FortiGate is also good, but I consider Palo Alto to be the best.

My overall review rating for this solution is eight out of ten.

WatchGuard Firebox  serves as the main use case for perimeter protection in my company. I use WatchGuard Firebox  for perimeter protection as the core of the network, where subnet segmentation is carried out.

We could also add everything related to geolocation services, geolocation of connections, traffic inspection, and network intelligence in terms of how we use WatchGuard Firebox in the core of the network for perimeter protection.

The best features offered by WatchGuard Firebox include the solutions, the ease of use, having a single appliance where I can incorporate practically all security services, and the management seems intuitive and quite easy to me, which is what I would highlight the most.

The ease of using the features of WatchGuard Firebox has made a difference in my day-to-day work as the Firebox configurations are done in an intuitive way, the application of different policies, network management, how very easily I can create a DHCP service for a specific network, and the VPN system is very easy to configure.

WatchGuard Firebox has had a positive impact on my organization because the improvement in security is evident, and economically, it is a product that is at a very good price point, allowing us to easily have remote clients connected via VPN in an extremely easy way with a lightweight client, which has had a very positive impact.

WatchGuard Firebox has simplified aspects of my work, for example, the process of enabling remote work has been advantageous because by deploying an automated Windows agent, it already deploys the VPN client quickly and easily.

I think WatchGuard Firebox could improve by making WatchGuard Cloud functionality more intuitive and by having better speed performance on VPN networks.

My impression of WatchGuard's spam-blocking capabilities is that this might be the weakest point of the product, as it does not have great spam management compared to other competitors in the market, but it has not affected us excessively.

I have not experienced improvements in terms of reduction in system bottlenecks after implementing WatchGuard Firebox.

I have been using WatchGuard Firebox for seven years.

Based on my experience, I consider WatchGuard Firebox to be a stable solution.

I find that WatchGuard Firebox's scalability adapts perfectly, and I have not noticed any problem that has prevented me from growing due to Firebox itself.

My experience with WatchGuard Firebox technical support has always been very satisfactory.

I previously used a Cisco solution before WatchGuard Firebox, and I decided to switch because of ease of use, technical features, and price.

I have noticed a return on investment since I started using WatchGuard Firebox because the solution is somewhat cheaper than that of competitors, but I have not had any staff reductions thanks to Firebox.

My experience with the pricing, implementation cost, and licenses of WatchGuard Firebox has been quite happy because it is cheaper compared to other competitors.

Before choosing WatchGuard Firebox, I evaluated other options, including Fortinet.

My advice to other professionals considering using WatchGuard Firebox is to use local management. I have provided this review with an overall rating of 10.