Check Point Antivirus Reviews

The main feature we use this product for is the firewall. The second thing we use it for is the secure VPN for connections to the corporate office. The third one is intrusion prevention and antivirus. It is an all-in-one solution for peace of mind.

There is really a fourth feature. The appliance has at least four interfaces. This allows users to have a different interface port per user group. It is a way of making network segmentation. There are four ports on that appliance, but there can be six or seven.

One of my favorite features is the logging. The log journal is very descriptive in what it records about the traffic. It is a good way of tracking who comes in and who goes out of your network.

I think this product is made by the market leaders. They have pretty much everything you can ask for as far as features are concerned. The pricing is high and I think it could be more competitive if it was lower. They might resolve that difference by offering even more features.

Another feature I'd like to see is a different way to handle load balancing on the firewall. Sometimes when you are using a firewall, you need another layer to properly balance your traffic. Right now that means adding more equipment, which is expensive. If Check Point could offer another option for a different way of doing load balancing, that would be a cost-savings for the client.

Another option might be offering data fusion. Sometimes you can combine the data stream. If you can and you do, you will have one stream instead of having multiple streams. That is also very cost-saving when you can fuse the data.

The product is stable. I'm quite satisfied with the stability.

I think the technical support is very good. They know what they are talking about and I get answers when I need them.

The setup was straightforward. The deployment took me only a couple of hours.

I am both a consultant and at the same time a systems integrator. I do the installations.

The pricing is really extremely high in comparison to the rest of the market. The cost for the licensing of the Check Point 3100 series is a little bit over 10,000 euros. But they also make the software subscription mandatory. That means that not only do you have to buy the appliance, but you have to also buy a subscription.

The other firewall solutions that my clients usually want to consider when they are looking for an anti-malware tool aside from Check Point are Fortinet (which is also a good product) and SonicWall (which is also a good product).

As far as how these products compare, I would say Fortinet has more accessibility in terms of just getting the product. Check Point is very hard to procure. You have to go through different channels, you have to follow different requirements and give a lot of private information in order to acquire it. Sometimes there are governmental laws and restrictions that affect the procurement of a product with such sophisticated encryption. It is almost like they have to clamp down on the encryption when the product is outside the US. It is like wifi. When you order wifi access points for the UK or for the US, there are different encryption algorithms. As soon as that product goes out of Europe or the US, it is illegal to keep the same encryption type. You have to lower the level of encryption for some reason. It seems very strange.

When leading countries start dictating what you should have and what you should not have, it seems like there is no justice. It should not be that you consider yourself a privileged country and you want to have a high level of encryption and not allow people in other countries to have it. If you believe in fairness, equality, and sharing — all of these values are things we hear them talking about, but that they don't allow us to experience. In just buying the goods, you have different standards for our country. The same product should be the same thing everywhere. We are on the same grounds and the same sky above you. It is not fair and even trades for everybody, but it costs the same.

Advice that I would give to others who are looking to implement Check Point Antivirus in their organization is the same advice I would give to someone considering any solution. Before you invest any money in any product — it could be Check Point, it could be Fortinet — you have to know what you are trying to achieve. If you don't know what you are trying to achieve, there is no purpose in buying anything. It will not serve a purpose. 

First, define your parameters, understand the risk that you are up against without the solution and what the benefits are if you buy. Then after you think about it, it is time to decide if it is worth it according to your actual needs. You do not always need to go to get fancy products and an enterprise solution if the purpose and scope for your plans do not fit the model of those products. Sometimes I hear people just say they want a product because they hear it is the best name. Sometimes a choice like that is more overwhelming. It does not serve the purpose, it is more difficult to deploy and people end up not even using it. The purchase becomes an operating capital that gets burned and spent for no reason when it was money they could have invested somewhere else. They just put the money in the wrong place because they want to do like everyone else. If you are talking about a large insurance corporation, their needs are much different than if you are talking about a small or medium-sized company that does not fall under so many government restrictions.

I would recommend Check Point Antivirus for medium and enterprise-sized organizations. Not for small organizations because it would almost always be too much. 

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Check Point Antivirus as an eight to nine. That is because they know their market. They are focused on what they do and they do only that. Their focus is not spread out so they produce the best product. 

The implementation was really easy. We were able to activate the antivirus blade and install it on the computers we required. In this way, we were able to provide security for malware protection - all represented by Check Point Security Management.

It was required to expand or have the license to use the antivirus security utility. A point that cost us at the beginning was implementing the licenses in the management server however, once up and running, it was easy.

It is an old brand that has all the anti-malware protection, signatures, and revisions to avoid vulnerabilities.

Our organization teams used a Microsoft-based antivirus. However, we already had Check Point gateways in use. We wanted to unify the protection more, and we tried the use of Check Point Antivirus. We really have no complaints. It offers good anti-malware protection and ransomware, among other modern threat protection features. The installation of the equipment was easy, and we achieved the main objective of unifying the protected environment.

We currently use Check Point Management R81, which is one of the most complete versions.

The logs and monitoring are valuable features. It generates enough visibility in terms of what happens on our equipment.

The sandboxing validates some files that have threat qualities. 

We like this security tool.

Check Point is one of the best security brands according to the Gartner quadrant. However, it needs improvement in some areas.

We would like to see better guides in the future with more concrete examples of the best practices.

The support is somewhat complicated. Sometimes they take a long time to solve problems. The language barrier is an issue for Spanish-speaking people. 

Support hours are generally contrary to the hours in Latin America. They could expand the support more and have more trained and effective technical personnel to help customers.

For at least eight months, we have used this solution, which greatly facilitates our security. It is an antivirus implemented through Check Point Gateway R81.

Previously, we used a Microsoft Antivirus. It's not bad. However, we wanted a tool integrated with our Check Point technologies, and therefore, we validated the options to make the required changes.

It is important to assess and verify the costs of Check Point technologies with an expert vendor to help determine the technology and tool that can meet the specific business needs of each company.

The documentation is outdated. However, if it is validated well, it is possible to obtain what is required for the implementations.

At the level of antivirus, we looked at Sophos and McAfee. However, the implementation most adopted in our environment was Check Point. We are convinced that it was the best option.

The product is an easy-to-implement and centralized antivirus solution. I recommend it.

We use this antivirus as part of our overall security solution. It handles the centralized investigation of internet content.

The most valuable feature is security.

Check Point integrates well with other security products.

The pricing can be improved.

The interface could be more user-friendly.

The initial setup and configuration should be simplified.

We have been using Check Point Antivirus for four years.

This is a very stable product.

We have not had the need to scale. We have about 3,000 people who are protected by Check Point, and three of them are administrators.

I would say that the technical support is okay. There are two levels; there is our installer, who we have known for several years, and there is the engineer, who we do not have much contact with.  

We use Windows Defender for our endpoint antivirus solution. For email protection, we use the FireEye Email Security solution. Our Check Point handles our central filtering and we also use some Infinity products. All of these work in combination with each other for our security.

The initial setup is complex. For the complete installation, our deployment took a few days.

We had the help of a Check Point specialist for our deployment.

This is a good product and one that I recommend.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use Check Point for ransomware protection. It provides standard endpoint protection. 

We need ransomware protection and that's what we get. It's a very good and robust antivirus solution.

As with most antivirus products, the reporting and management could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable, we have a few thousand users. 

We haven't had any issues with the technical support. 

I previously used Symantec and McAfee depending on the requirements at the time. There's not much difference between all the solutions in this area. It comes down to how manageable they are and how frequently false positives exist in that environment and whether they slow down the transactions or the processing of the machine. 

The initial setup is fairly straightforward, deployment takes a few minutes. It's just a matter of setting up the server, your policies, and pushing out the agents. 

Our ROI has been from an operational perspective. If you're not fighting with a product every day, it saves you time and money. 

Licensing costs are usually paid annually or every three years. This is not a particularly expensive solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Due to many attacks in our country, we decided to look for a robust solution to avoid current threats, including ransomware among others.

Our company was looking to protect our infrastructure or perimeter, but due to constant attacks in our country with modern threats to computer systems, we decided to use a tool that can provide us with the correct security. In addition to validating that we could include it in our Check Point environment in a simple way.

The simple administration gave us the ability to provide greater security with the company's permission, avoiding threats such as malware, among others.

We currently have this resource and we can manage and verify it from our management server.

We have been able to internally provide security to our teams, with robust antivirus security policies to take actions and regulations to prevent the spread of viruses and malware that is modernizing more and more.

This antivirus blade is not like the previous security versions, it really is a powerful tool which provides this additional layer of protection against malicious files that could affect both data and systems, we feel safer and calmer with this solution despite all the attacks that have occurred in recent times in our country, but not in our company..

We really like this antivirus security tool, included in the security management server used for our Check Point gateways. The ability to include blades is very good, it allows the centralization of security in our gateways natively.

There is also a lot of documentation to be able to use this security feature in the best way using the best practices indicated by the manufacturer, with this we guarantee the use of the tool correctly.

Finally, in our company, we like the ease of implementation.

Check Point Antivirus could use improvement in some areas, as almost all blades within the security management server are not the same as in gateway management.

On the other hand, the solution is expensive, they could improve costs in order to win more customers.

There are new tools that generate this protection, so this tool can become old, I would like for it not to be discontinued.    

Once this tool has been implemented in Microsoft Azure, it can be used with a VSS or with a cluster to provide scalability.

We previously used ESET, but it did not meet expectations against ransomware at an enterprise group company we support. We prefer to opt for a tool with prestige.

Check Point's tools, specifically this one, are quite stable to manage from the security management server.

The costs are high, however, the tool fulfills its security objective very well,

I recommend looking for a good partner that will help you both with your needs and find the right tool to provide the company's internal security.

It is always a good practice to review the options in the security market to avoid threats and acquire the solution that best suits the company's conditions.

We use Check Point Antivirus to protect our company's perimeter. Specifically, we implement antivirus measures solely on the perimeter firewall. This strategy safeguards the company, especially considering the files accessed by employees. Check Point Antivirus shields us from malware and viruses.

Check Point detects files containing malware, which some users are trying to download or access. Additionally, it can consolidate multiple emails into one.

Check Point is easy to configure, and it detects many threats.

The antivirus could be improved in terms of the resources it consumes, particularly regarding CPU and memory usage. We've encountered issues with some of our firewalls, leading us to turn off the antivirus feature due to its heavy resource consumption. Enhancing its performance would allow us to run it on smaller models without overburdening the CPU.

While it is a valuable security feature, Check Point should ensure that the hardware is properly dimensioned to support the antivirus feature, providing some margin for potential resource demands. The values provided in the specifications should be realistic and adequate to support the feature effectively on the Check Point firewall.

I have been using Check Point Antivirus for ten years.

Sometimes, Check Point Antivirus raises connection issues even when the license is valid. Consequently, we encounter difficulties installing the antivirus on various devices. Moreover, the solution isn't always stable. Occasionally, update failures occur without apparent reason, necessitating the need to open a support case.

One thousand users, including the financial, IT, and HR teams, are utilizing this solution, essentially encompassing all departments in their company, as everyone uses the internet. From our experience, it's very resource-intensive and not one of our most scalable features. As I mentioned, sometimes we encounter CPU logs on some firewalls, often related to the antivirus. Therefore, sometimes, we need to turn it off or adjust its settings.

I rate the solution's scalability as seven out of ten.

The solution should have better support from more knowledgeable engineers when opening a case rather than starting with junior engineers and escalating after one or two weeks.

Neutral

Once the security gateway is up and running, you simply navigate to the features section, ensure you have the appropriate license, and enable the antivirus feature. Then, you can select one of the recommended profiles. Once you've chosen the profile, you're all set.

It takes one day to deploy if you have already added the firewall.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

We have the license for all the other FortiGate, which comes with the IPS and antivirus. However, you need to pay for the antivirus separately. In terms of cost, it is slightly more expensive than Fortinet.

Check Point Antivirus has helped us protect our company's security exposure. It has already detected some files that, if successfully downloaded, could pose a significant problem.

However, it consumes a lot of resources. Enabling antivirus on the Check Point firewall is one of the most resource-intensive processes you can allow, even more so than the IPS.

We requested that antivirus be enabled on three of our firewalls because the CPU usage was consistently 90%. Testing this feature has shown that some improvements in performance should reduce resource consumption.

We enable Check Point's default recommended profile. Preset profiles are already available; we choose one to help without configuring our own.

I would recommend improving the performance to reduce resource consumption and enhance stability.

In terms of security, Check Point Antivirus is practical and improves our company's security posture.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Today, with our current organizational needs, we find great complexities when it comes to protecting each of our users inside and outside of the network. As a result, we came to use solutions that had not been deployed yet, and one of them is the integration that Check Point has in its range of solutions, such as the Blade and what we know today as the Check Point Antivirus. Thanks to this solution, we are protected.

The  Antivirus is part of the added value we are getting from Check Point. It's offering greater prevention and detection of attacks. The solution adds value to our organization since it is protecting us and integrates analytics with the Check Point cloud. We're getting great computing power and analysis behind the security. 

Its most valuable feature is the integration of analytics with the cloud. We like that we can detect zero-day incidents, problems, or virus attacks inside or outside the organization. It's one of the most complex and integrated antivirus solutions. The value of analysis in real-time every time we are having an attack, vulnerability, or security breach is very helpful. Today, we want to have integrated solutions and quick solutions that will protect us mainly with new attacks and solutions that protect us from the hijacking of our data (ransomware).

I would like to be able to see this integration of device analysis and verification - not just in native-integrated solutions - for Linux and iOS mobile devices, which are today a part of the larger group of devices and solutions that we have available. We want the solution to help us achieve 360-degree security across all work teams. 

I've used the solution for about two years.

The solution is really simple. It is not difficult to configure, and it is very stable for me, from my experience.

Due to its deployment, it is integrated within our network, and it is a quick and easy solution to scale or modify.

The Antivirus Blade is one of the Blades we always buy for all of our Check Point firewalls to protect us against virus propagation into our infrastructure. Check Point has a huge database that protects us against viruses that is especially important for the internet-facing firewalls.

The feature that we find most valuable is the easy way of configuring it via the SmartConsole on Check Point. The configuration is very straightforward and although it has some impact on the firewall CPU and memory, it doesn't impact the IPS, for example. It allows for the scanning of downloaded files from the internet. Scanning files that our users have downloaded to check if they have any virus is the most important thing. IPS and Antivirus work in conjunction. It doesn't even cross the perimeter firewall to the inside.

Sometimes the antivirus updates fail. We don't understand why because sometimes it fails but the next time you try it goes well and the firewall always has access to the internet. We don't understand why it sometimes fails.

We have been using Check Point Antivirus for four years. 

It's very stable. The only thing is that sometimes the Antivirus Blade fails but then the next time it succeeds. We get some alerts that the Antivirus Blades fail. But it then automatically updates. Antivirus is different from IPS, it's always trying to update and it's automatic.

It scales well. You can use the same profile and the same exceptions on all the firewalls on the management. It's deployed to eight firewalls. 

It takes three people to maintain the solution. They are security, engineers, and architects.

Technical support is good. We were getting some logs without any information and we couldn't get to a conclusion of what that was. We gave up because it was not a big deal, but it was the only bad experience we had with them. In general, it's good.

We also used Fortinet's Antivirus. They are equivalent from one to the other. Even the configuration is similar. There's not a big advantage to one or the other.

The initial setup was very straightforward. If you want to block a virus, for example, the signatures have a medium or higher impact. It's very easy to create the initial profile. It's also very easy to deploy exceptions with the SmartConsole.

We could do the deployment without all of the fine-tuning in one day. 

Our implementation strategy was to start with the Blade on detection mode for at least one week, then check the box to see what would be brought in if we were on prevention mode and see if we need to do some exceptions or if there are any false positives. If not, we put it on prevention mode.

Our return of investment is to have our infrastructure protected and to see that something is a working virus that would otherwise be able to reach our infrastructure. 

Usually, Check Point products are not cheap but compared to Fortinet, it's in line with the competition. There aren't additional fees that I'm aware of. 

If you have Check Point firewalls on your infrastructure, this is the best solution to deploy because it's just to enable a Blade. If you don't have Check Point firewalls, you should also consider other solutions. If you already have Check Point firewalls, the traffic is already going through them so it's just a matter of enabling the Blade. 

Try to run through the manuals to see the signatures and how to deploy and to create a profile. You can install the SmartConsole and run the demo mode and you can do some simulations without having to deploy a firewall. It's also good that you can do the demo mode and try to create an exception to create a profile.

It's not very hard to have a network antivirus solution which can be very important to protect the network. It should be as important as having the antivirus on the end-user's machine.

I would rate Check Point Antivirus a nine out of ten. Not a ten because of the updates.