Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Thanos Constantopoulos - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager, Managed Security Services at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
Real-time attack recognition and integration provide peace of mind while safeguarding websites
Pros and Cons
  • "Support is the same with on-premise devices, and it is very good. Since it is cloud-based, I do not need them as much."
  • "It helps me sleep at night, providing peace of mind."
  • "If the price could come down, I would be very happy with the product."
  • "Pricing is high, although possibly justified by the service received."

What is our primary use case?

Protecting our websites or our customers' websites is our top priority. We transitioned to Check Point WAF from on-premises WAF to safeguard our external perimeter. Essentially, I am focused on protecting our external infrastructure and web services.

How has it helped my organization?

It helps me sleep at night, providing peace of mind. It saves time, money, troubleshooting, and maintenance and reduces the need to hire people to manage the technology because it is so easy to use.

What is most valuable?

The WAF is the best feature. The application firewall's ability to block and recognize all attacks in real-time, such as DDoS, is invaluable. Identifying attacks and integrating with the rest of the ecosystem are features I am very fond of.

It's a pretty robust product.

CloudGuard protects against threats without relying on signatures. This is one of the best features. As an engineer, I don't have to review signatures one by one by one. 90% of the other players use signatures. So you have to review the attack, the signature, and how to mitigate it, etcetera. Removing the signatures from the equation removes a lot of time required for an engineer to review signatures, apply signatures, verify that these are applied to the infrastructure, etcetera. So removing that from the equation and protecting the infrastructure at all times is very cost-effective. 

Signature-based also causes a lot of false positives. So having no signature also helps remove a lot of the false positives. 

What needs improvement?

I cannot think of any needed features.

Pricing is high, although possibly justified by the service received. Reducing prices would be welcome. 

Integration with more technologies or Check Point products, or on-prem products, could improve robustness. Many organizations are moving to the cloud. Some cannot fully transition and require solutions similar to on-prem devices. 

Buyer's Guide
Check Point CloudGuard WAF
March 2025
Learn what your peers think about Check Point CloudGuard WAF. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2025.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used the solution for the past two years.

How are customer service and support?

Support is the same with on-premise devices, and it is very good. Since it is cloud-based, I do not need them as much. 

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used CloudGuard, Imperva Cloud WAF, and Barracuda Cloud WAF. I have experience with all of the major players.

What was our ROI?

I have seen what we were used to before and how much time we spent. We used to manage on-prem devices for other partners that could run from other vendors. When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If the price could come down, I would be very happy with the product.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I will not disclose which vendor is the best. In specific cases, some vendors perform well, while others are competitive at the high end. Check Point is one vendor that I really appreciate, and I will not mention the other, however the competition is very close.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. Nobody is perfect. 

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner Reseller
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Ashish Upadhyay - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at BlockMosiac
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability
Pros and Cons
  • "Its ability to adapt to our applications and ensure our security policies are followed is a big plus."
  • "The documentation needs to be updated, more improved, and simplified... so that even a beginner can start with this application. It can make things more beginner-friendly."

What is our primary use case?

In our company, which creates decentralized finance applications, the platforms we create for enterprises... we need robust security measures to address and protect against web application vulnerabilities. 

CloudGuard WAF helped us to provide protection by leveraging its contextual AI to detect and prevent threats. So it also helps us to check against the OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities and zero-day exploits. It can help secure our applications, as dictated by our company, against injections, cross-site scripting, cross-site request forgery and CloudGuard's AI-based approach also helps us to detect and mitigate threats with more accuracy. 

Also, it helps us to secure our APIs so only authorized requests are processed, preventing unauthorized access, data misuse, and other API-related vulnerabilities. 

Its automation capabilities also help streamline security processes within our blockchain environment by automatically detecting and responding to threats. This reduces the burden on security teams and allows us to focus on strategic tasks. 

Also, its ability to adapt to our applications and ensure our security policies are followed is a big plus.

So, main use cases include securing web applications, automation capabilities, and the ability to adapt security policies.

How has it helped my organization?

It helps us prevent different attacks by cyber hackers, such as SQL injections and cross-site scripting attacks. Its AI-driven feature helps us to detect and mitigate other threats, which is very useful. 

Also, we've faced network trouble managing endpoints, and CloudGuard WAF managed that quite smoothly. It also smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability. 

Additionally, it completely prevents and secures our products. It helps us rate-limit any malware attacks on our APIs and enables blocking of malware, phishing, or similar elements in the system. It is very worth it. It's very versatile and deployable, helping us create virtual and deployable products for any kind of IT variety.

the integration feature is really nice. It integrates with the other solutions we use. The integration process is very good, which is a key point for this solution.

What is most valuable?

One of the features I like is results-driven threat detection. This feature allows our company to analyze various factors such as user behavior, session patterns, and application interactions to actively update risk assessment for each endpoint while leveraging AI with context. 

It helps us effectively detect and prevent a wide range of attacks, including the OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities and zero-day exploits, without the need for extensive manual rules and tuning. This not only enhances the security posture of our applications but also reduces false positives, ensuring legitimate traffic on the website or apps is not blocked. 

Overall, its security and AI features make it a powerful tool for acting against modern threats.

The reporting capabilities are really nice in CloudGuard WAF. It has AI-driven features which help us to identify issues. As it reports, we were able to find out more features as well. The platform generates comprehensive reports whenever we detect security events. These reports are customizable. 

Also, because of its security features, it provides us with threat analysis and historical data, so we can track our security performance over time and make informed decisions. So, the reporting features provide visibility into our applications and help us to stay ahead of emerging threats.

What needs improvement?

There is room for improvement in the pricing strategy. By reducing their cost and extending the trial period, Check Point can attract more partnerships and customers, keeping up with other vendors in the field. It has a trial period, but they can extend it so we can better evaluate how it's working in our environment and how well it is suited.

It should be converted to activate some discounts on buying standard versions. This will attract more of us, and we'll get more time to check the application and how it works.

Additionally, their effort to involve IT teams would mean continuous adaptation to meet business requirements. This can help with the price picture and increasing the trial period so we can better evaluate the cost-effectiveness. 

Also, Check Point need to continue developing new features and arrangements in line with changing business requirements.

The analysis time while it analyzes itself is very time-consuming. They need to improve the latency and minimize the steps involved. 

Also, the documentation needs to be updated, more improved, and simplified... so that even a beginner can start with this application. It can make things more beginner-friendly.

Also, Check Point can bring some updates to the integration features with other security solutions, making it easier to integrate. For instance, it needs to integrate with solutions someone might have various firewall solutions from IBM and others, depending on which ones the business wants to integrate with.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using it for one and a half year. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's quite stable in deploying with the firewall. Sometimes there is some instability, but it gets fixed later.

I would rate the stability a six out of ten. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We have about five to six end users. It is AI-driven, so it's more of an automated system. We don't need that many users for it.

How are customer service and support?

The customer support are very nice. Whenever we face a problem, they guide us with the solution. They're also very experienced and helpful. If we ever encounter any difficulty, there is quick support for IT needs.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

How was the initial setup?

The deployment process was very well-documented with clear instructions, which made it easy to follow. The integration with our existing cloud environment was seamless. CloudGuard's team led us to an easy deployment and helped whenever we faced any issues. 

The configuration, with guidance on necessary settings and automatic features, minimized the overall manual intervention required. 

Once automated, we didn't need to do much. For setup, it saved us a fraction of the time. It allows us to keep the setup without any waste of time, unlike what I've seen in other applications.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy to set it up. 

The deployment didn't take much time. It was very quick, about a couple of hours.

What was our ROI?

We have seen a significant improvement in our ROI. Our security operations became more efficient with a reduction of 35% in the time spent on rule tuning and threat detection. This efficiency gain led to 25% increase in productivity for our security team. 

Additionally, the reduction in false positives has decreased incident response times by 20%. Overall, it has enhanced our security posture, and the ROI from implementing CloudGuard Secure was impressive.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is not that expensive considering what it offers. So, it is moderate price. Per day it costs around $0.91.  

It costs about $1.145 per hour. So for a year, it will cost about 8,988 euros.

What other advice do I have?

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

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Check Point CloudGuard WAF
March 2025
Learn what your peers think about Check Point CloudGuard WAF. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2025.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.
ISO at Bank-Fund Staff Federal Credit Union
Real User
Top 20
Protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures
Pros and Cons
  • "We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results."
  • "In terms of features, I do not have any negatives. Their integration is extremely quick. It is better than others I have been involved with in the past. Their pricing model, however, can be better."

What is our primary use case?

We have multiple cloud tenants, such as AWS and Azure, and we wanted to make sure we are secure.

By implementing CloudGuard WAF, we wanted to avoid using the built-in WAF. We wanted to avoid using the WAFs built into our Azure or AWS products. We wanted to make sure that we were using something proven and secure.

How has it helped my organization?

It is extremely important to us that CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. We are a financial institution, and we want to make sure that we do not have any type of traffic that infiltrates our cloud environment. We have 90,000 members around the world.

CloudGuard WAF is very good in terms of false positives. I do not see a lot of static noise, which we used to see with other apps that were in place. It is fantastic.

CloudGuard WAF has been fantastic for preemptively blocking Zero Day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies. I would rate it a ten out of ten for that. As soon as we see a Zero Day, we get the alerts right away, and we are able to do the patching. This guarantees the use of our services. It is immediate and in real-time.

CloudGuard WAF has reduced the total cost of ownership for our web application firewall. It has reduced the overhead of not having people manually look at or review the alerts. It has been more automated.

What is most valuable?

It is mainly for egress and ingress, just making sure that we are keeping the proper traffic. The integration with Azure ExpressRoute was also key for us.

We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results.

What needs improvement?

In terms of features, I do not have any negatives. Their integration is extremely quick. It is better than others I have been involved with in the past. Their pricing model, however, can be better. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using CloudGuard WAF for two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have had zero issues. Being a financial organization, just like others, our big issue is having any kind of downtime. Any downtime affects our members, and if our members are affected, they will withdraw the money. It has been fantastic. We have had zero events.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There are no real ends. We are a smaller environment compared to what they are used to working with. I have no concerns with being able to scale with them.

It is being used across cross-functional teams for different applications that are involved. We have 335 employees, and at least 300 employees touch this environment at any given time.

We definitely have plans to increase its usage. There are some plans in-house to expand the cloud environment.

How are customer service and support?

They are fantastic. We never had an issue. Whenever we need something, we get a response. 

We also have a managed service provider. We have engineers from the Teneo group, and they are always great if we need any help. 

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using the built-in WAF, but that was before my time, and I knew better. 

We did not go with our cloud vendor's web application firewall because it is against the best practices. From everything I have read and studied, I would rather go with something that is proven. There are a lot more vulnerabilities that have been exploited with native WAFs.

How was the initial setup?

It is a public cloud. We have AWS and Azure.

I was involved in the initial deployment only from a high level. I was able to support the team to grab the necessary resources. Outside of that, it was just more of approvals.

Its deployment was straightforward. The deployment was outlined very well. We use one of the resellers and managed service providers for Check Point called Teneo. They explained everything. They told us exactly how it was going to go. They had their folks in place, and it was just very straightforward. It was very easy.

What about the implementation team?

We had the help of Teneo. They were brilliant, and then I was able to help the team with the right pieces to get it accomplished.

We recently did an integration with Azure ExpressRoute. We are bringing it in so that we have a safer way for the egress and ingress with our vendors. I wanted to make sure that we involved the infrastructure team. We had a cloud architect and our cybersecurity team involved. We also ran it through our change advisory board and the architectural review board. We wanted to cover all bases to make sure that all aspects are covered.

What was our ROI?

We have definitely seen an ROI. There has been a consolidation with not just the cloud stack, but Check Point in general. It has been nice to eliminate products. We have already eliminated close to $250,000 annually in different tools by consolidation.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This is where I have a different opinion. If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not evaluate other solutions only because we have Check Point in-house, and I was able to talk to our rep. We were able to get a nice solution from them, so we did not have to evaluate any other solution.

What other advice do I have?

To those evaluating CloudGuard WAF, I would advise that for integration, make sure they have a trusted partner that is going to help them with the integration plan or they have the in-house skills to develop that plan. 

I would rate CloudGuard WAF a ten out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Fernando Ortega - PeerSpot reviewer
CISO at Paschoalotto
Real User
Top 10
Simplifies our security management and enhances our ability to monitor and analyze logs effectively
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature we have found in Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its rich logging capabilities."
  • "I feel like I need more clarity in understanding pricing for DDoS protection."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use cases include enhancing security for web applications and APIs, optimizing resource utilization to reduce costs, and maximizing efficiency in log management for better insights and savings.

How has it helped my organization?

CloudGuard WAF has improved our organization by simplifying security management and enhancing our ability to monitor and analyze logs effectively.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature we have found in Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its rich logging capabilities.

What needs improvement?

In terms of improvement, I feel like I need more clarity in understanding pricing for DDoS protection.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with CloudGuard WAF for a month.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

CloudGuard WAF impressed us with its stability; it is a powerful tool providing great visibility.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

CloudGuard WAF's scalability is excellent, especially as a SaaS, offering significant improvements over on-premises environments and providing consolidated scalability.

How are customer service and support?

The technical support is amazing.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used Cloudflare. Now, we are testing WAF to enhance our log insights.

How was the initial setup?

The initial deployment was straightforward. We transitioned from an on-premises solution to a SaaS model, which was simpler and more useful. Our implementation strategy involved redirecting the site to the new solution and creating policies to ensure smooth operation.

What was our ROI?

We haven't seen ROI metrics yet, but we expect long-term benefits, especially in budget management and risk reduction.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Before choosing CloudGuard, we evaluated options like Azure and AWS. The main differences lie in policy customization, market size, and preset features. Each has its pros and cons, but CloudGuard stood out for its robust policy options and wide market presence.

What other advice do I have?

By implementing Check Point CloudGuard WAF we aimed to address challenges related to enhancing security for web applications while leveraging powerful logging capabilities.

We check false positives in CloudGuard WAF using logs and the interface, and we have had very few issues, which helps our business.

Using preset policies, the solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies without requiring full data.

The solution has cut our web application firewall costs because it is adaptable to our environment.

My advice to new users would be to focus on the benefits of software as a service and ensure clarity in understanding pricing, particularly for DDoS protection.

Overall, I would rate Check Point CloudGuard WAF as a ten out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
reviewer2647476 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager Head of Security Operations at a educational organization with 201-500 employees
Real User
We get a consolidated view, good security, and excellent scalability
Pros and Cons
  • "From a security perspective, it is quite good."
  • "Check Point CloudGuard WAF works well for preemptively blocking Zero Day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies."
  • "I am pretty happy with the current version. I have not yet used it to its full potential, but there could be improvements as I explore it further."

What is our primary use case?

I have a team that manages CloudGuard for me. We have different research centers using various cloud accounts and are trying to consolidate everything into a single landing zone to protect those areas. From a use-case perspective, I have different laboratories or research centers utilizing it for various purposes. We are mostly focused on AI, and some of those requirements cater to the AI segment as well.

How has it helped my organization?

From a protection perspective, Check Point is a well-renowned name. We are also using other products from Check Point, such as Harmony, Infinity, and XDR. We have a consolidated view of the overall security posture, which I find quite interesting.

CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. This is crucial for us to maintain application security and stop the threats coming into our environment, keeping our production part secure.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF works well for preemptively blocking Zero Day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies. It is the best. That is why I am paying for it.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF helps us with overall application and cloud API security. The consolidated view of the security posture that Check Point provides is very useful from an upper management perspective.

CloudGuard WAF has helped reduce our false positive rate by 30%.

What is most valuable?

From a security perspective, it is quite good. I am not very familiar with the detailed features of it because I have a team that manages it. 

What needs improvement?

I am pretty happy with the current version. I have not yet used it to its full potential, but there could be improvements as I explore it further. I am content with what I have in terms of features and support, but if I start expanding the usage, I might need more help from them. I already have the best consultants from Check Point. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for around seven or eight months now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I have not observed any stability issues yet. It has been pretty reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is excellent and is one of its best features.

How are customer service and support?

Customer service is one of the best in the market right now.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not use a similar solution previously. 

How was the initial setup?

We have a hybrid deployment model with AWS as the cloud provider. 

Its deployment was smooth. We did not have any issues. 

What about the implementation team?

We used Check Point for the implementation.

What was our ROI?

It has been only six or seven months now. I am hoping that by the time I complete one year, I will see the return on investment.

It has reduced the total cost of ownership for our web application firewall to a certain extent, but I do not have the numbers.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The sales team or account managers from Check Point are top-notch. As I am using other products as well, my pricing was competitive compared to others.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I considered other solutions. I decided on Check Point because of its comprehensive suite of applications and the integration with my tools, providing a consolidated view of my security posture.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate Check Point CloudGuard WAF a nine out of ten. I believe there is always room for improvement, but there are use cases I have not yet explored. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Amministratore Della Sicurezza Di Rete at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
web servers remain secure and defacement is eliminated
Pros and Cons
  • "Before CloudGuard, we periodically had some website issues. Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again."
  • "Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again."
  • "The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good."
  • "The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good."

What is our primary use case?

I use the solution for almost all of our web servers.

How has it helped my organization?

Before CloudGuard, we periodically had some website issues. Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again. 

What is most valuable?

The rate limit feature is the most useful feature of the product.

We don't need to rely on signatures. We are protected when the signature doesn't exist. 

It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies. It blocks items that would affect the company.

We've been able to reduce our false positive rate. It took a bit of time, however, not long. We're near zero false positives. 

What needs improvement?

The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good. More user-friendly features could be added. Perhaps something between CloudGuard management and the virtual appliance on-site could be faster. 

It could be interesting to have an app for smartphones to manage all the cloud environments.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for three years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is always good. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is always good.

What other advice do I have?

I rate the solution nine out of ten. I am satisfied. It is always good. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Piyush Mishra - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager-Cyber/Information Security at Lauren information technologies
Real User
Top 10
Enhancing web application security with advanced threat protection and a straightforward setup
Pros and Cons
  • "One of the best features of CloudGuard WAF is its user-friendly GUI dashboard."
  • "Support could be improved, particularly in terms of availability."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use Check Point CloudGuard WAF for web application security. It protects applications from various threats and vulnerabilities like SQL injections, cross-site scripting issues, and cross-site request forgery. We ensure proper security policies and logs are maintained.

How has it helped my organization?

CloudGuard WAF helps by providing advanced protection for web applications and APIs, defending against the OWASP top ten scenarios, and offering comprehensive AI-driven behavior analysis. This assistance in data protection is vital for financial domains such as banks.

What is most valuable?

One of the best features of CloudGuard WAF is its user-friendly GUI dashboard. It's easy for beginners in security to understand and set policies. The solution's easy access and AI-driven behavior analysis for real-time threat detection are also highly valuable.

What needs improvement?

Support could be improved, particularly in terms of availability. Although they provide 24/7 support, there are sometimes delays in delivering solutions. Advanced bot protection has recently been improved, which has helped a lot.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for over four to five years, working as a project manager and handling implementation projects. We are primarily focused on Check Point CloudGuard implementations.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I would rate the stability of the solution as a nine out of ten. The solution is quite stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, I would rate it a nine out of ten. The solution is highly scalable.

How are customer service and support?

Customer service is satisfactory yet requires some improvement. I would rate support as an eight out of ten, as there is room for enhancement.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have experience with other WAF vendors such as Imperva and Imperva WAF, which are leading products in India and have a significant presence in the US and UK.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is generally straightforward, yet it can vary depending on the client's platform and whether deployment occurs on-site or remotely.

What about the implementation team?

We have a team of around 25 engineers; 50% handle project implementation, while the other 50% provide post-deployment support.

What was our ROI?

Return on investment is seen when data is properly organized, and the ability to show reports to top management ensures that their expectations are met.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing is average—not too expensive, yet not cheap either. CloudGuard offers bundled packages, which may reduce costs compared to paying for individual features as opposed to other providers.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have evaluated solutions like Empower and EmpowerVac, which are leading WAF products in India and other countries.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend Check Point CloudGuard WAF to other users due to its availability, scalability, and support. These aspects contribute significantly to receiving new contracts and maintaining client referrals.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
reviewer2379006 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Enigner at a transportation company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Top 20
Robust protection against web application threats with easy deployment, comprehensive feature set and excellent catch rate compared to competitors
Pros and Cons
  • "On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
  • "Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement."

What is our primary use case?

We utilize Check Point CloudGuard to protect our Office 365 email system from phishing attempts, which were becoming increasingly common. Additionally, we rely on it to secure our usage of Microsoft Teams for collaboration, as well as for our SharePoint platform. Furthermore, we leverage CloudGuard Endpoint to safeguard our machines, particularly because many of our end users frequently travel abroad. This ensures that we have visibility into their activities and locations, allowing us to restrict access if necessary or provide remote assistance when needed.

How has it helped my organization?

We were facing several challenges that prompted us to implement CloudGuard Application Security. Previously, we used another vendor for email security, but we found that many emails were slipping through, requiring us to manually review each one. This became a significant overhead, as we had to ensure that every email was properly tagged. With Check Point's email security solution, this overhead was practically eliminated. 

Now, the number of emails slipping through is minimal, perhaps only once or twice a month. Additionally, Check Point's solution streamlines the process by notifying users of potentially legitimate emails that were flagged as suspicious. This feature has been particularly helpful since our company relies heavily on email for contract-related communications. On the endpoint security front, we were impressed by Check Point's ransomware protection feature, including its anti-ransomware rollback capability. Having experienced the importance of such features in previous roles, it was a straightforward decision for us to switch from our previous vendor to Check Point.

The benefits we've observed are significant. On the email front, my workload has been drastically reduced, practically eliminating overhead. As for Check Point, it provides peace of mind knowing that in the event of a ransomware attack, the system has a rollback feature. This reassures me that I'll have the opportunity to investigate and diagnose any issues that may arise.

In terms of email, Check Point's solution effectively blocked numerous phishing emails that were previously slipping through, which is a significant advantage. Regarding Check Point in general, the cloud-based management capability is highly beneficial as it eliminates the need for on-premise appliances or servers. Additionally, it ensures that I can still manage the security of devices even when they're outside the corporate network.

It's very important that CloudGuard Application Security defends our applications against threats without solely relying on signatures. Relying solely on signature-based detection is limited, as it's only as effective as the signatures themselves. With the ever-evolving nature of threats, especially in environments like conferences where new threats emerge frequently, relying solely on signatures may not be sufficient. I've taken the initiative to test various security solutions by experimenting with different malware downloads and observing how they perform. This hands-on approach underscores the importance of having a robust behavioral engine, like the one provided by Check Point, which adds an additional layer of security beyond traditional signature-based detection.

Regarding false positives with CloudGuard Application Security, particularly in emails, I've encountered very few instances.

The solution has effectively lowered our total cost of ownership for our web application firewall, particularly in the context of email security.

We opted not to go with our CloudGuard vendor's web application firewall because, in the case of Microsoft, we decided to try their email security system. However, it didn't perform as expected, with many threats slipping through. Consequently, Check Point's solution proved to be more effective in this scenario.

What is most valuable?

On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far. Regarding email security, the standout feature is the minimal overhead, essentially reducing the task to routine maintenance.

What needs improvement?

One area for potential improvement is the management interface. Occasionally, when there are major updates, the layout of the menus changes, which can be somewhat disruptive as I need to search for familiar options. Consistency in menu structure would be beneficial, as it allows users to develop muscle memory and navigate the interface more efficiently over time. Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using it for five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In terms of stability, I find it generally reliable. However, there have been a few issues, particularly with license renewal, where the system would unexpectedly go offline without notifying me. This would sometimes take a couple of days to resolve, requiring support intervention to address licensing issues.

How are customer service and support?

Tech support is prompt, knowledgeable, and efficient. On a scale from zero to ten, I would rate them a solid ten.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, our email security solution was provided by Barracuda, and our endpoint security was handled by ESET.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward, primarily because it involved mainly APIs, which simplified the process.

What about the implementation team?

I was in charge for the deployment.

What was our ROI?

We've observed ROI primarily in terms of cost reduction. This is mainly because there are fewer servers to manage now compared to other solutions, where on-premise servers were necessary.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I find the pricing to be reasonable.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I also evaluated SentinelOne, CrowdStrike, Mimecast, and CheckPoint. Ultimately, I chose Check Point because of its comprehensive IT toolset, which allows me to manage all aspects from a single dashboard. I appreciated the convenience of not having to switch between different units for different functionalities, thus avoiding the creation of multiple interfaces.

What other advice do I have?

The advice I would offer to others regarding Check Point products revolves around their robust features, particularly the rollback feature. I appreciate how Check Point handles this compared to some competitors who use their own driver on the DriveSpace, whereas others leverage Microsoft VSS. Regarding email security, it's straightforward to deploy and has a high catch rate compared to competitors. Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Check Point CloudGuard WAF Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: March 2025
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Check Point CloudGuard WAF Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.