Private User hitting IP limit of Home use license. where can i buy a license?

Hello newone , 

Thank you for reaching out to the community, you can inquire here - https://www.sophos.com/en-us/products/unified-threat-management/how-to-buy
Contact your sales team - https://support.sophos.com/support/s/article/KB-000036399?language=en_US
Locate a Sophos Partner or Reseller - https://support.sophos.com/support/s/article/KB-000036398?language=en_US

Great!

Thanks a lot. Lets see if that works

To be honest, this product is end of life and as such, I believe they've even stopped selling license, or will soon.

You can go to Sophos XG which doesn't have that IP limitation (but does have hardware limits) or another product, such as PFSense or other firewall equivalent.

To have Sophos give you a link to purchase an EoL product is just ... squeezing blood from a turnip so to speak.

i think you are very right. i just realized that. Its very very sad: I really liked the UTM.
Been using it for roughy 10 years now.

pfsense / opnsense is probably the way forward: But... for some reason those bsd based boxes were always a magnitude slower when it came to throughput. i ran pfsense for some time, had to use a pppoe-mp version (dont rememer the exact name) because "the default" pppoe implementation was single threaded and could not handle the bandwidth my isp provides me with.Right now its 10g symmetric, roughly in a year it will be 25g symmetric.

For me UTM was a great product, the balance between having all knobs and simplicity was great.
Also the combination of features it had: pretty sweet. If i remember correctly: Wireguard and multicast relaying (urgh: sonos) are about the only things I ever missed.

What features did i use?:
- dynamic Routing (ospf & bgp)
- pppoe
- reverse Proxy
- Roadwarrior VPN via Openssl
- IPSec VPN
- POP3 / SMTP Spam and Virus detection
- Wireless Controller (until i had to replace them because of problems with AP100s even sophos could not fix)
- IPFIX / Netflow Export
- DNS / DHCP / NTP..

Being honest here - I am testing out PFSense Plus with Snort, Site-to-Site IPsec to another PFSense Plus firewall 300 miles away.  Not impressed with IPsec at the moment, but that could be an ISP issue.  Once I can switch to fiber connectivity, I expect that to improve.  

However, the firewall itself is a much-noticed improvement over performance from XG. Even download speeds are better than UTM or XG, with the same hardware used and Snort applied across all versions. I haven't completely configured tit-for-tat yet, but it's very close.

As Jay Jay said, it's a learning curve - but I would equate it to a much easier experience than XG was comparing that to UTM.  Going from UTM to PFSense is quite easier than going from UTM to XG for me. It's almost a relief when I went from XG to PFSense.  I did also have two APX120s in a MESH environment locally that XG/UTM were managing, and those were replaced with Ubiquiti APs setup in a near identical environment, but they require UniFi Controller to manage.  That however is a free software application in both Linux and Windows, and I run mine on a Linux VM along with network management.

I literally don't mess with my firewall anymore nor my APs, unlike what I had to do with XG.  Boxing with my firewall on a daily basis just for basic things were tiresome for me.  Sites that were fine one day were blocked by XG the next day.  AP performance went from iffy to horrid. XG performance dwindled and needed a reboot weekly.  Standard memory usage sitting at 70%+ all the time (probably due to the hardware limitations for the home users).  It just wasn't for me. 

Even if I discontinue use of PFSense (but I doubt it) I will not come back to XG, I will put UTM back on and continue it until the wheels fall off.

Other users absolutely love XG, but it's not for me personally.  I love the Sophos Home AV product and have a subscription to that for a few years now and will continue to use it.  Infrastructure though, no longer for me.  

With my current hardware - proxmox 7.4 5800x, 4 cores 12GB assigned to UTM, I avg ~600 mbps up/down on connections filtered through snort running an ookla speedtest.  Without snort I get full line speed in either direction.

I haven't tested snort/suricata with pf yet, but expect somewhat better results as their implementation is multi-threaded.  It's unclear if it's multithreaded based on clients or connections. If clients, then expectation is about the same speed. Amodin If you are seeing faster speeds in your use case then it sounds like it is multithreaded based on connections, regardless how many clients these connections originate from.

Right, but that was allegedly implemented here too - and my personal belief on that is it doesn't work properly, or it just didn't happen.  Using Snort 'from the source' here with PFSense seems to be the much better performance option.

Right, but that was allegedly implemented here too - and my personal belief on that is it doesn't work properly, or it just didn't happen.  Using Snort 'from the source' here with PFSense seems to be the much better performance option.