Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP Reviews

The solution is for used for protection of workloads.

It offers good detection. This capability allows us to effectively manage compliance. 

It helps us find misconfiguration. We use it to try to find possible storage accounts that may be misused or other misconfigurations.

The effectiveness of its cloud security posture management is good. It's really helpful for us and allows us to comply with various standards.

It helps our company identify risks that are most critical to our business. It not only saves us time, it provides us with the visibility we need to manage the cloud.

I don't have any notes for improvements. I'd need some more time to work with it.

I have used the solution for one year.

The stability is good.

We haven't had issues with scalability.

We have not had any issues with customer service so far.

This was the first solution I tested. I have not used a different solution. 

The initial setup was straightforward.

The pricing is decent.

We only really tested the capabilities of native tools before we implemented this solution.

My overall product rating is ten out of ten.

CloudGuard is a posture management and workload protection platform. We're also using it for data and risk management.

Our environment includes a hybrid cloud and three public cloud providers: GCP, AWS, and Azure. CloudGuard enables us to manage all the cloud providers from one dashboard. It enables a team approach, so we're more flexible and operationally efficient. The solution provides a holistic view from a single dashboard, making posture management and threat prevention more effective. Detection is not a significant challenge. When I block a particular incident, CloudGuard will implement some kind of prevention activity so that those types of activities are prevented automatically in the future. Prevention is more beneficial for us.  

When managing our service partner, CloudGuard enables easier enrollment and allows us to consolidate all those rules and privileges. It will give them complete visibility of the identities that I am using for all the services, whether it's privileged user access or a normal user. It's based on user suggestions. CloudGuard helps me handle my user identities.  

Another benefit is posture management. We are governed by four regulatory entities in India. We need to stay in 100 percent compliance by avoiding any misconfigurations on our platforms, and this tool helps us.  It also helps with virtual protection of our code by adding another layer of security and an extra step. It can detect abnormalities in the image and register, enabling us to identify and fix compromised packages before any major release. 

As a regulated entity, we receive a monthly external audit from the agency, and we always pass them using CloudGuard because we have a  single dashboard for multiple services for user activity reviews and policies that we have set for the user levels. It's easy to demonstrate our compliance posture using this portal and any incidents with compromised credentials or NetFlow security. 

CloudGuard allows us to do more work with fewer people. A team of six people can manage our entire enrollment. CloudGuard covers a huge footprint. It saves a lot of resources, but I cannot measure that in time saved. Onboarding and learning the product took six months, and it took us another year to address all of the solution's findings. The third year should be focused on monitoring. I can't quantify how much time is consumed in days or weeks, but if I had to rate it on a scale of one to 10, I would say nine. 

A reduction in human error is part of posture management. When we first onboarded to the posture management platform, we had to customize and build some rules for enrollment. We fixed the issues we found, and we don't need to run the posture management tool again. Instead, we run the GSL builder and cross-check the findings. Before addressing the finding, we must create a default rule set in the GSL  Builder. We copy what's in the builder and execute it on a particular enrollment, and we'll say it is good to go. We can save time building custom rulesets with GSL builder, but it's hard to say how much. 

We like the GSL Builder feature. When you're running a security operations center, you spend a lot of time monitoring endpoint activity to ensure there is no malicious traffic or anonymous access in the environment. The GSL Builder is helpful for deep investigations of a particular reason for an incident. You can use it to get more information.

We have more than 30 AWS accounts and use more than 16 versions with some different tenants. I don't want to turn on each enrollment and app one at a time in the application. With GSL Builder, I can select multiple accounts from one place and execute the commands. I can see the results of which entities passed and failed.

It's easy to write custom rules and policies. I have limited coding knowledge, but I can make policies from inside the UI. It will show what services are available in the cloud provider, and I can go through and check the ones I need. It requires no scripting knowledge. If you have experience in the industry, you can immediately learn GSL Builder and adapt it. 

Auto-remediation is a module you can enable at the enrollment level. It detects and fixes human errors or misconfigurations.  For example, we can't create a bucket that is exposed to the internet for compliance reasons. CloudGuard can prevent that bucket from being created, ensuring compliance. 

With effective risk management, we can identify every asset and assign a score to each network violation or process. We will flag the most critical assets and bring them to private subnets. There's also a graph, which is useful if we need to explain things to developers and administrators.

The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product. 

For example, let's say it's showing a process violation. It should be able to do some additional malware scanning in that particular bucket to get some additional information. I don't want to integrate with another third-party tool or go to the native server to check something. It would be helpful to have integrated monitoring and malware scanning for the file types. 

There are a few flaws with the security management portal where I have limited visibility into the workload protection features. There is no error visibility where I can see the communication and workflow between services. Some of the dashboards need to be fine-tuned if they are not customized. For example, I cannot customize anything on the effective risk management dashboard. Some of the information is not correct for my tenant. With respect to passwords and user management, there are no policies I can measure at the user level. If the user was created more than six months ago, you don't need to worry about that password or do anything like two-factor authentication associated with that user. They can still log in after six months or one year. 

It's also a challenge to use CloudGuard's agentless workload posture with AWS. An Azure storage is summed up with a CNAPP encryption by default. We tried onboarding this data, but the problem is the attachment is not done. After a few days, we identified that it was impossible to do the encryption detection. But CloudGuard's default rules say that this has to be encrypted. 

The AWS module says that we cannot access this volume with this encryption, so we cannot use an agentless workload posture with AWS because of this. It is a best practice to ensure that all the volumes are being encrypted. Without the encryption, how can I do this? It is a big challenge for CloudGuard.

I have used CloudGuard for 14 months.

We only see downtime when there is a global outage. It typically only lasts a few minutes. Also, we sometimes see latency issues when accessing this portal. We double-checked that with the team also, and they asked us to check on our network side. We are in the office network, so we could not refer to that. 

Some of CloudGuard's modules are slower. For example, if I go and click on the posture, it loads immediately within 30 or 50 seconds, but workload protection might take more than a minute. There are some differences in the latency between the services within the cloud version.

We don't have any issues with CloudGuard's performance or scalability. 

I rate Check Point support 10 out of 10. Their customer service is fantastic. We have premium support, so I don't know what their standard support is like. When we open a ticket, they immediately call us back regardless of the severity. 

Positive

We have Prisma Cloud, which is not fully implemented, so we need to use Check Point simultaneously. Prisma Cloud excels in terms of UA, visibility, and user-level policies and management. CloudGuard is more cost-efficient but not as user-friendly as Palo Alto. At the same time, having the GSL Builder makes it more efficient to make CNAPP rules without much background knowledge.

Generally, the deployment is pretty easy. We have a template, so it's automatic. However, we run into problems when we're supporting multiple CSPs. AWS supports CloudGuard 100 percent, whereas for Azure, it's 75 or 80 percent. Some Azure services, like user identity, are not supported, which is a challenge. It should be available in Q1. 

Deploying the threat intelligence for AWS was fine, but we had problems with Azure. I'm part of the security group, which is onboarded into the AWS. The next time I create a new security group, it automatically discovers the asset and will put it in the log. For Azure, a new network security group must be added manually. If I'm doing that manually, I want to completely remove the onboarded threat intelligence, which means I want to completely remove what we added from the portal. That is one problem we face doing the onboarding of Azure.

I don't know the initial proposed amount, but the procurement team looked at the market and compared Prisma and CloudGuard, then settled on one solution.

I rate Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP nine out of 10. Any advice I could give to potential users would be completely based on their use cases. You must look at various criteria, like your environment and enrollment level, but my general advice for implementing a CNAPP solution is to get a cloud dev. 

If you are using AWS with multiple CNAPPs and you don't have a control tower or any other landings in the budget, you want to do policies at each enrollment level. But we're using this out that what we do is, like, we build guardrails where we can apply it at the enterprise level itself. 

For example, we'd want to allow any data to be researched outside the area. I'll create one policy and apply it at the organizational level. I set a policy so that any user in my enrollment could not create an SD bucket or any volumes outside using their agent. If you have multiple CSPs, AWS accounts, or Azure subscriptions, this is one solution where you can cover your entire organization's accounts.

We are a multi-cloud service provider that leverages all major cloud providers, such as AWS, Azure, GCP, and OfficeLab, for our internal consumption and for our customers. Managing and monitoring the compliance of the platform across hundreds of accounts can be challenging, especially without a solution like Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, which continuously scans and alerts us against policy violations. If the policy is violated, we are alerted, the issue is identified, and we are assisted in resolving it.

It is easy to write custom rules and policies using the GSL Builder. We do not need to learn any programming language or structured query language to write back queries. GSL Builder enables us to click and drag to build our own rules. For example, if we want to fetch all the servers that are accessed publicly, we can simply put down the servers where access is public. GSL Builder creates an easy-to-use interface so that administrators no longer need to know a specific language to make this happen. Therefore, once the query is ready, we can quickly test it to check its effectiveness, modify it quickly, and then start using it.

Non-technical people can learn to use the GSL Builder in less than ten hours.

We have reduced human error using GSL Builder by 20 percent. For example, if I have to write a query, I could make a typo or omit spaces, which could cause the query to be structured incorrectly. With GSL Builder, the only thing humans need to do is drag and drop logic from existing utilities. This means that I can simply click and select when to perform an action, and the system will generate the query for me. This reduces the amount of human input required and, consequently, the likelihood of human error.

The GSL Builder has saved us a significant amount of time. What used to take several hours now only takes a few minutes to complete.

Automatic remediation is very helpful. When an alert is raised, it allows us to trigger bots that can automatically fix the issue. For example, if I'm granting server access to the public, I can create a remediation rule to monitor this. If the rule is violated, the bot will automatically disable public access. This has been very efficient for us.

We have created custom policy checks for our organization, leveraging industry standards such as CIS and SIPAA. We also perform custom assessments against the policy based on our regulatory requirements. Overall, this helps us to mitigate risks and ensure compliance integrity. It also helps us to build cloud solutions correctly and detect and respond to unauthorized authentication changes and security compromises.

Unified Security Management provides a single pane of glass view, eliminating the need to toggle between different consoles and service providers to get a complete picture of our security landscape. The solution provides all the answers we need on a single dashboard. Simply connect to the portal to get all the information we need. For example, if we need to understand the details of a specific cloud, such as its name, configuration, and additional attributes, we don't need to log in to the cloud or another service provider. We can simply look up the server within the Unified Security Management dashboard.

Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management has helped our organization achieve almost 100 percent compliance from zero visibility. I'm proud to say that we upgraded hundreds of thousands of tools and assets against the policy set, and we are now close to 99.6 percent compliant. CloudGuard Posture Management has been very effective for us. In an ever-changing landscape, we ensure that we meet our compliance requirements. Once we have achieved compliance, we can change our policies to make them more stable, and then we strive to meet those standards again.

We have strong in-house capabilities and a team of developers who have a deep understanding of CloudGuard Posture Management. Using the solution's APIs, we can automate our security. We have been able to segregate workloads, accounts, and assets by department, business, cloud provider, and responsible stakeholders. We can then secure these assets according to our internal business requirements. All of this has been achieved and made possible by the CloudGuard Posture Management platform.

The best thing about agentless workload posture is that it doesn't impact our production workloads. Other solutions install agents on our system and continuously scan them, which can sometimes cause performance problems. CloudGuard Posture Management, on the other hand, takes a snapshot of our current workloads and scans it offline, which is a more efficient process.

The solution has helped us reduce our compliance and audit activities. I used to spend a week capturing all the data required for an audit and now I can do it in a couple of hours. With a click of a button, we can run reports to show auditors our compliance for anything in the last run mode. We can also download, share, and view all the details, including how many views are assessed against an account, the outcomes, and the current posture. All of this information is clearly presented in black and white, so we don't have to manage any data ourselves. If we want to report against certain clients, such as those covered by HIPAA, we can get a comprehensive report that we can easily share with our auditors.

CloudGuard Posture Management has reduced a lot of effort. Before implementing the solution, I had to write a separate script for each platform. Once I had the data, I needed to spend time understanding the output of the scripts and identifying the compliance aspects of compliant assets. I also had to segregate the data for all clouds and then work on it. Finally, I had to repeat the same exercise to see if things had remained secure. This was a very tedious process, but CloudGuard Posture Management has saved us a lot of time.

CloudGuard Posture Management has saved our SecOps team time. It is connected to our alerting systems and is accessible to all of our security teams. This includes the security team, the operations team, and the backend team. All of these teams have access to the solution and can see the changes that they are implementing and whether or not they are segregating properly. They are also constantly monitoring the alerts that are raised to take corrective action.

Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides a complete overview of all our cloud security solutions. It offers a single-pane-of-glass view of our entire cloud inventory across all cloud service providers.

Another advantage is that CloudGuard Posture Management supports a wide range of automation capabilities and has access to APIs that we can leverage. For example, I can take proactive actions based on an alert without having to interact with the platform directly.

The ability to help organizations modify their own policies is essential. For example, consider the CIS benchmark 1.5 for AWS. In the past, I would have added the CIS rulesets to my custom policy, along with my own rules for Internet requirements. This created a custom policy that was tailored to my specific needs. However, the CIS benchmark is constantly changing, and it can be difficult to keep my custom policy up-to-date. As a result, I now have to recreate my entire policy whenever the CIS benchmark is updated. This is a time-consuming and manual process. Adding a feature that allows me to easily identify the changes that have been made to the CIS benchmark and update my own policy accordingly would be a valuable addition to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management. This would save me a significant amount of time and effort.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management for seven years.

Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is stable.

Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is scalable.

Check Point's support needs improvement. Given our extensive knowledge gained over the years, my team has found that we get better support from Check Point's higher-level team than from their basic support team. We only reach out to Check Point support for serious issues, such as product bugs or encounters. We find that basic support is not adequate and that we only get proper support when our issues are escalated.

Neutral

The initial deployment was straightforward. Two admins from our organization along with some solution architects and one consultant from Check Point helped us with the proof of concept, and we were able to acquire the solution after the POC.

We have seen close to a 40 percent return on investment with Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management.

The pricing is extremely competitive.

I would rate Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management ten out of ten.

If an organization is in the market for a cloud security solution, then it needs a solution like CloudGuard Posture Management. Otherwise, if they are sticking to a specific platform or to a specific service provider like AWS, their tool sets and their solution will be focused on one platform. If they go to Azure, GCP, or any of the other cloud providers, they will be limited. Therefore, I believe that a solution should have flexibility and the ability to function across multiple clouds. Additionally, it should be a solution that grows and evolves. In the time that I have seen Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, it has grown leaps and bounds and has always stayed ahead of its time. For example, even if an organization has a unique need, CloudGuard Posture Management likely has an academic solution built with the platform. I have not seen this kind of responsiveness from other products.

Our company is spread across four different cloud platforms, which are located in regions around the globe. All departments use these platforms, which include 550 employees.

I highly recommend Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management. It has been very helpful to our organization, and we have gained many benefits from it. We have had a positive experience with Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management.

We use Check Point CloudGuard for full visibility across our workloads in the cloud and on-premises.

The GSL builder's graphical interface makes writing custom rules and policies easy, but some knowledge and training are still required. The training required takes around two weeks to complete.

The GSL builder helps reduce human errors by almost 80 percent because it provides compliance rules and performs intelligence queries on our behalf.

The GSL builder saves us time creating custom rules. Initially, defining the rules takes time, but once that is downloaded, it becomes an automated process. We save around ten hours per week.

Our organization requires the use of Check Point's auto-remediation feature. This feature automatically analyzes and remediates threats, enabling us to perform forensic analysis on detected events. By implementing this feature, we benefit from several detection capabilities, including anti-ransomware and behavioral analysis, which ensure comprehensive threat detection and analysis. Additionally, the auto-remediation feature automatically quarantines and remediates malicious files, preventing data breaches. As a result, we can leverage the forensic report to enhance our endpoint security posture and effectively protect our internet connectivity.

The auto-remediation feature stands out for its ability to prioritize alerts. It focuses on high-risk issues first and then remediates them accordingly.

The unified security management console, a component of the monitoring tool, offers a comprehensive overview of our platform's security posture. This holistic view enables us to promptly identify emerging environmental threats and conduct thorough investigations, ensuring swift and effective responses.

The evaluation of the application depends on its criticality. For example, in an airport scenario, an AODV application is used for critical operations. This means that the AODV application is of high importance and requires a more thorough investigation or a faster response in case of issues.

Check Point CloudGuard has significantly improved my cloud threat handling. It has been a great asset in increasing my security posture score due to its automated remediation capabilities. Additionally, its threat intelligence provides valuable insights, making it a comprehensive security solution. Furthermore, CloudGuard offers comprehensive lifecycle security for all my applications, including new deployments. It also addresses complex security needs within my cloud environment, ensuring compliance with all relevant regulations and governance requirements.

CloudGuard provides good performance for automating our organization's security across assets, workloads, and multiple clouds.

The agentless workload posture plays a crucial role in determining our organization's security posture. This includes security and posture management, threat prevention, and high-availability posture management. All these aspects are highly important, and they also help automate my DevOps multi-cloud security threat level.

Network security helps us reduce the amount of compliance and audit activities we need to perform. It provides advanced threat protection, allowing us to inspect all traffic entering and leaving our private subnets within our entire virtual network. This comprehensive approach ensures robust network security and ongoing time savings.

CloudGuard can help free up around six hours of our staff time because it can be integrated with different applications and systems. 

CloudGuard's unified platform can free up an average of six hours per day, a feat impossible for any human worker. However, the system's automated configurations can function around the clock, achieving this level of efficiency.

The most valuable features are the ability to create pipeline rules, the enhanced NetOps security, and the deep visibility across our entire infrastructure. 

Check Point CloudGuard also helps us adhere to the compliance and regulatory requirements, I can ensure best practices are implemented, prioritize risk management, and prevent critical attacks.

Automation and advanced threat prevention have room for improvement. I would like the rules configuration which are manually reviewed to be automated according to the defined rules.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard for two years.

Check Point CloudGuard is stable.

Check Point CloudGuard is scalable.

The technical support is good.

Positive

The initial deployment required knowledgeable people. We had already planned the required configuration type, the necessary posture management approach, and the rules that needed to be defined. We had discussed these requirements with the CloudGuard team member and implemented them together. Four people were involved in the deployment.

A person from CloudGuard helped with the implementation.

We have the enterprise-level license and we renew it annually because it is worth the cost.

I would rate Check Point CloudGuard an eight out of ten.

Check Point offers a bundled solution that includes cloud threat hunting, cloud migration security, DevSecOps, and cloud security compliance. This comprehensive package is a superior choice as it provides a unified approach to cloud security.

We have Check Point CloudGuard deployed in one location with 400 users.

A team of four admins performs maintenance on CloudGuard every quarter.

CloudGuard boasts advanced threat prevention for network security, seamlessly securing public, private, and hybrid cloud environments. It also provides unified security management and simplifies complaint handling.

I use CloudGuard CNAPP to protect and gain visibility into vulnerabilities across our cloud workloads in a multi-cloud environment spanning AWS, GCP, and Azure. By implementing CNAPP, we have successfully reduced vulnerabilities in our cloud infrastructure by 70-80% over the past two years.

CloudGuard has significantly improved our organization's security posture over the past few years by reducing critical vulnerabilities by up to 80-90% across various workloads. This enhancement has led to lower security costs and enabled us to effectively communicate our improved security stance to stakeholders, putting us in a much stronger position than before.

The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its reporting capabilities for aggregating vulnerability information and scoring, as well as its CloudBot feature, which automates remediation deployment across our diverse workloads in various accounts and regions.

One area where CloudGuard CNAPP could be improved is in its reporting capabilities. Customization options for building tailored reports would be beneficial, as it would allow for different views on vulnerabilities based on specific criteria such as tags or dimensions. Currently, the reporting features have some limitations in providing the level of customization we require.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP for about three years.

We haven't had any stability issues with the solution so far.

Scalability, particularly in workload protection, is an area that needs improvement. It is challenging to roll out workload protection to different teams, and there is room for enhancement in this aspect.

I would rate Check Point's service and technical support as an eight out of ten. The pre-sales team was excellent, providing expert assistance, and our experience with the technical team has been good so far. 

Positive

The initial deployment of CloudGuard CNAPP was extremely straightforward since it is agentless and seamlessly integrates with public cloud tools. We began with a POC, then gradually rolled out the solution across all our cloud accounts, starting with AWS and expanding to GCP and Azure.

We have seen a return on investment in terms of reduced vulnerabilities.

I find CloudGuard CNAPP's pricing and licensing to be flexible, allowing us to explore new features without hard limits. Currently, we operate under an enterprise agreement with the flexibility to utilize the tools we need effectively.

We initially evaluated Palo Alto's cloud security posture management solution but ultimately chose CloudGuard CNAPP due to its faster implementation process and cohesive reporting capabilities. CloudGuard CNAPP's simplicity and comprehensive reporting aligned better with our need for efficient deployment and intuitive data analysis, making it the preferred solution for our cloud security requirements.

The benefits of using CloudGuard CNAPP were realized very quickly, almost immediately after deployment. The implementation process was straightforward and seamless, leveraging agentless integration with existing cloud security tools. The positive results were clear from the start.

We use CloudGuard CNAPP's CSPM capabilities extensively. We assess CSPM for identifying misconfigurations by running automated processes to scan all our cloud accounts. We prioritize risks, work with technical teams to explain vulnerabilities, and initiate fixing processes, deploying available solutions or performing manual/automated remediations. We then report progress to our teams and iterate on the process as needed.

The effectiveness of CloudGuard CNAPP's CSPM for providing compliance rules and security best practices is high. Its policies align well with common standards like NIST or CIS frameworks, enabling effective assessment against known vulnerabilities. This alignment facilitates communication and understanding between teams, streamlining the resolution process for identified vulnerabilities.

CloudGuard CNAPP's CSPM effectively identifies risks critical to our business, particularly focusing on exposure and availability ratings. It saves us significant time, likely reducing the resolution process for critical risks by around 30-40%, as it provides pre-configured assessments and clearer insights compared to starting from scratch.

The CloudGuard CNAPP team provides excellent visibility into incident investigations by simplifying access to cloud workload configuration logs and integrating with tools like SIEM platforms. This enables the incident response team to ingest data from CloudGuard CNAPP and correlate it with internal indicators, streamlining the investigation process.

We use CloudGuard CNAPP across eight countries in South America and North America, with around 130,000 employees and approximately 5,000 engineers. We manage over 100 AWS accounts and support various applications, including e-commerce tools, generating over 10,000 notifications.

My advice for someone evaluating CloudGuard CNAPP would be to start with a hands-on exploration of the dashboards and data provided by the solution, then focus on internal selling and localized deployments. The biggest lesson I have learned from using CNAPP is that while it is easy to start with, achieving full adoption and maximizing its potential requires thorough preparation and dedicated effort from the team.

Overall, I would rate CloudGuard CNAPP as an eight out of ten.

We have our CSPM and CNAPP services powered by CloudGuard. Those are the two that we are doing direct services for today, but as a reseller, we offer all the pillars.

We are a value-added reseller. We are not necessarily using it as our own. We are not a dev shop, but those are the use cases. If one of our customers has a dev shop and is working out of the cloud, this is where they look to get some better understanding and control over what their development team or their DevOps team is doing and building. This is where CloudGuard CNAPP comes into play.

CloudGuard CNAPP definitely helps with bringing the controls, which can then play to compliance. We have a few key customers in the utility space, so compliance is a major driver. Being able to apply required controls through CNAPP helps and benefits them.

Security is not a No, where you have to say, "No. You cannot do it." By having the CNAPP toolset for the DevOps team, you enable them to do their work, and it is securely done.

We use CloudGuard CNAPP's Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) capabilities. We have been using CSPM for just over a year. We use it internally for our own IT security. We are a company with about 75 people, and our IT security uses CSPM actively not just to respond in time but also to help manage and keep an eye on all the controls and things.

Cloud Security Posture Management identifies the risks that are most critical to our business. It helps us to prioritize those. 

We do not use CloudGuard CNAPP's CloudGuard Workload Protection capabilities. We do not have a development shop. That is where the workloads come into play, but absolutely, that is where our customers could get some of the value to be able to keep their automations and speed going by having those workload protections in place. 

It is able to bring visibility into that cloudy space where the security departments do not really see what is happening on the DevOps side. It brings visibility, security control, and standardization. These are some key features.

I am not a technical person, but generically, the user interface can be a little more intuitive. Our staff has trained network security and cloud security professionals, and they get it, but when you are trying to get to the customers to be able to pick it up and maintain it, it can be a bit difficult, so the user interface can be a little better.

We have been using CloudGuard CNAPP for just about a year.

It is a Check Point product. It is not going anywhere. We have known CSPM for years, and it has only got improved every step of the way. Our impression is that CNAPP and the other pillars will do the same. They will continue to be steady and sturdy.

Their top-end technical support is excellent. Like anything else, it is hard to get to TAC, but we are an elite partner, so we have great channel support and strategic support. We have good experience with tech support.

We have not used any other solution. We have been a Check Point customer for a long time. When it started to come out, we started to take it on.

We are primarily on Azure, but our customers are in AWS and Azure. We do not have a lot of work with Google Cloud. We have a little bit of Oracle cloud, but AWS and Azure are the two big players we see our customers using.

I am not involved in its deployment, but I know that for CSPM, which is probably related, you discover as you go. You deploy it, and you are able to get the overall insights into what the environment is. I presume you would lead with that and then work on the workload and CNAPP, but I have not had to do it myself.

We have seen an ROI, but I do not have statistics to back it. Even for our small internal IT, it helps with efficiency and reduces the time in having to go through and try to find all the misconfigurations and other things. That time is money, and that is the return on the investment, for sure. I presume our customers feel the same way when they are using and deploying, especially things related to CNAPP. Once deployed and in action, they save a lot of time because one hour of prework saves ten hours as a rework, and that is what we get with CloudGuard CNAPP.

We evaluated Orca and Wiz. We are a value-added reseller, so we do sell them. Wiz has a lot of good and competitive aspects to CloudGuard features, but CloudGuard is very competitive with them, and we are deep partners, so we lean towards that.

To those considering this solution, I would say that it is pretty easy to get it started and get the evaluation going. Check Point has a whole cloud team that is there not to sell you anything but to help find where you are in the cloud journey and bring evaluation and other things forward.

CloudGuard CNAPP is definitely in the upper echelon. I would rate it a nine out of ten. It competes very well with other solutions such as Wiz. If you break it down, it competes very well with them. That puts it right up there at the top.

CloudGuard is a tool for evaluating the health and configuration of an account. We primarily use it for AWS, but we also use it for Azure. I also use it for inventory and historical reporting.

We work with 50 AWS accounts. Four teams across a couple of time zones use CloudGuard. Our security and DevOps teams are the primary users, but the support team occasionally uses it. Management consumes the output and the reports. I think it makes them feel good, so that's nice. 

I recently transitioned into a management and architecture role. CloudGuard helped me delegate to my engineers the day-to-day tasks of operational care and feeding and health assessments of the environments. I previously spent more time building rules and implementing automatic remediations. Now, I let it fly, and my engineers operate it. 

I helped with the design and build, and I was originally in charge of the run. I've now handed off the run, which enabled me to do more. I think it helped those guys to be effective and do more. I'd say it freed up the equivalent of a quarter to an eighth of an FTE.

CloudGuard allows us to scale. As we bring on customers, more accounts come online, and more platforms are deployed in our environment, I don't have to scale my team linearly with the growth of our product. These rules work over and over on the number of accounts. I think that's a place where it will help us as our customer base grows.

The security operations team saved some time. I'm on the team, so I do a lot with this. It's one of the essential tools. Depending on the incident, Check Point can be extremely helpful in understanding the configuration. I use it ad hoc or tactically in those conditions. At the same time, other operations or security incidents are out of view of Check Point and Dome9, so it doesn't come into play. When the problem is at the account or configuration level, it makes remediation and troubleshooting an investigation easier.

It saves time because I can look across the organization. Instead of checking 50 different accounts atomically and spending 15 minutes investigating each, I can spend 15 minutes exploring all 50 accounts. It allows me to quickly look across the org for similar problems when one comes up. That's a huge time saver. 

The most valuable feature is the ability to create a reference rule set and use that to evaluate an account's health. It provides daily reports on any drift from that rule set and real-time alerts. Some of the automated remediations are also helpful.

I like the GSL Builder, which helped us reduce human error. It helps answer a question quickly in real-time that I might not want to put into a specific rule that I evaluate across all my accounts all the time. In many cases, we've built rules that we consider everywhere for the posture of all our essential accounts. However, I often work on an issue or question, and I just want to see who has this configuration or misconfiguration. GSL Builder lets me quickly locate all the S3 buckets with a faulty configuration. I use it tactically like that sometimes.

I'd be sad if it went away. However, you couldn't throw an inexperienced person at it and expect them to get any value from it without some handholding or spending time to read the documentation and think about it. You must know about the asset you interrogate to write a good rule or to do a good evaluation. That isn't a Check Point problem, but it's a general issue in cloud security. 

CloudGuard offers several pre-packaged rules for various evaluations, such as NIST, 853, etc. I went through them, found 50 rules I think are handy, and put them into a custom rule set. Then, I spent time writing about 30 rules specific to my environment. I use those to evaluate the health of my accounts continuously. 

We check health insurer information because all this data is highly confidential and protected by HIPAA. We use these rules to evaluate our cloud properties constantly. I can't imagine the time that would take to perform this kind of evaluation by hand or using another tool. That's why we have Check Point.

There are many auto-remediations available. We use a few and wrote a couple of our own. It's an excellent risk management tool. We use it because we're so paranoid about the security of our environment. I've used this tool at other companies in different industries, and they've been apprehensive about automatic remediation. It depends on the part of the world you live in. I use it, and it stopped problems, so I've gotten tremendous value from auto-remediation.

The ability to prioritize alerts has been handy. It enables me to focus on critical issues instead of common misconfiguration. The visibility into my workloads is pretty good but not great. I don't use it at a granular level. I'm primarily focused on protecting my overall cloud posture and the health of the account with CloudGuard, but I also look for some common misconfigurations that might be workload-induced.

Making basic rules is easy, but it's complex if you want to do something a little more nuanced. I've been unable to make some rules that I wanted. I couldn't evaluate some values or parameters of the components I look for. I haven't always been able to assess them.

It feels like some attributes of resources can't be interrogated through the GSL the way I would like. For example, I wanted to figure out all the systems launched with a particular image that had been running for 31 days or more. Until I talked to the Dome9 people and the support team, I didn't understand how to frame that query in GSL. The support team told me how to do it, but I couldn't figure it out alone. The documentation is a little unclear about how to do some of those configurations. More tutorials and examples on the blogs and support pages would be helpful. 

I had another problem when we tried to encrypt all of our storage volumes. There is a feature called batch jobs or Elastic MapReduce jobs. CloudGuard sometimes can't detect the encryption status of the underlying disks of those systems that process my workloads. It pops up with a bunch of alerts that say, "Non-encrypted volumes have been found in your account." 

Those jobs are dynamic, so they spin up, run for an hour or two, and all the systems are destroyed. By the time I checked it, all the systems were gone. CloudGuard threw a bunch of alerts in the middle of the night when all these things happened, and I went back to evaluate the configuration. I know they were all encrypted because I can see how it was deployed. It didn't have a great insight into my actual workload, but it generally tells me when people launch unencrypted things. It isn't perfect, but it's okay.

I have used CloudGuard for four years.

CloudGuard has been solidly stable. I'd say nearly perfect.

CloudGuard's scalability is decent. They're switching to a new onboarding methodology that I'm not in love with, but I think we'll find a way to make it work and continue to scale. It has been good.

I rate Check Point's support an eight out of ten. I've contacted them with a few questions or issues and always had good support experiences with them. I'm not a huge customer paying millions of dollars a year. I work for a small startup on the bleeding edge of technology, and I feel like Check Point and Dome9 meet me where I am. 

It wasn't trying to shove a network firewall, like a data center security tool, down my throat. Palo Alto and Check Point are old-school network security appliance vendors that are out of their depth in cloud security, so they bought tools like bought Twistlock and Dome9. Check Point's acquisition and management of Dome9 have been excellent. I can still talk to people at Dome9 and get support for this tooling, but it has been difficult for me to do that with their competitors. 

Positive

I've used Palo Alto Prisma Cloud, but I've also used Palo Alto's Cloud Security Posture Management tooling. I prefer Check Point, which is why we have it.

I still have both solutions, but I use Palo Alto for something else. I use Twistlock, a Prisma Cloud module, for runtime protection of containerized workloads. I also use Dome9 for CSPM. I did not like using Prisma Cloud for CSPM because I did not care for the rule language or configuration. 

Also, I feel like Check Point, and Dome9 listen to their users. If I'm dying for a new feature to improve the solution, they would hear me out and consider it. I guarantee you that Palo Alto doesn't care.

Deploying CloudGuard is straightforward. I deployed it and configured the auto-remediation alone, but I also worked with another architect to discuss the design and workshop some ideas, so we could say a team of two deployed it.
After deployment, maintenance has been very low.

We've seen a return. It still makes sense to write a check. I can't imagine going back to doing it the way I did before. It's essential for my compliance program to have this tool in place. If I could save the $100,000 or more I pay annually and use cloud-native tools, the additional time I would spend tuning and doing everything I'm doing with CloudGuard wouldn't be worth it, at least not in the first year. 

CloudGuard is fairly priced.

I rate Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management an eight out of ten. I advise new users to start with a defined list of goals or problems and implement the solution in a way that initially prioritizes their most significant issues or primary goals. Don't try to boil the ocean. In other words, don't enable all the features and do everything at once. They will be overloaded unless they know what they're doing. Go feature by feature, function by function, and area by area. Determine where your critical risks are and implement the solution based on that knowledge.

I think there are some benefits to using a third-party tool. For example, these tools might simplify and enrich features or offer focus. You're adding another view or pane of glass to your security world, but once you start to look across clouds, it becomes interesting. I have to write all my own rules for Azure and AWS. At the same time, I can get the same report delivered to my inbox that I can then feed to my executives, showing them the health of these cloud properties. 

It looks cohesive and coherent instead of using separate native tools for AWS, GCP, Alibaba, and Azure and trying to compile all those reports and metrics. At least I can distill my posture into a commonsense readable score and transmit that to the executives. I can tell them, "Our posture's at 98% compliance." They can comprehend that and compare the scores from week to week. It helps me from a reporting angle.

We use CloudGuard to secure apps we develop in the cloud.

Before Check Point, we didn't have a cloud solution. Having a CNAPP solution gives us confidence that our cloud apps are secure. From day one, we saw that the product was working and detecting issues in real-time. 

CloudGuard's best feature is real-time detection. We can detect incidents and vulnerabilities in our code with one click. I was amazed by CloudGuard's VM protection. It's easy to deploy, and I feel safe. I'm absolutely satisfied with it. 

I have used CloudGuard for about one year.

CloudGuard is stable. I haven't had any issues. 

CloudGuard is scalable. We've had no problems implementing it for our cloud infrastructure. 

I rate Check Point support 10 out of 10. Check Point's technical support is excellent. 

Positive

The implementation was fast and easy, and Check Point's professional services are highly effective and professional. We deployed it with an in-house team of two to three people. 

The cost-effectiveness of this investment was high. The money was well spent because I solved my security problems. 

I would like CloudGuard's pricing to be cheaper, but I think that's impossible. The pricing is the only thing I think they can improve.

I rate Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP nine out of 10. I recommend that complex corporations test CloudGuard before implementing it. When you see the solution in action, you can witness its security and power.