Check Point Harmony Endpoint Reviews

Check Point Harmony Endpoint is used mostly for endpoint protection.

It protects endpoints for our customers.

The traditional anti-malware engine is valuable.

There should be an indication when you assign an endpoint to be a local proxy for other endpoints. The current system doesn't clearly indicate whether the assignment was successful. I even talked to Check Point support about considering this as a feature request.

I have been familiar with Harmony Endpoint for about two years.

I did not encounter any stability issues with Harmony Endpoint.

I would rate the scalability as 9.5 out of ten.

I had no problems with Check Point support. They were very helpful and competitive, and we had various calls where they connected to our implementation and provided assistance.

Before using Harmony Endpoint, we used other similar solutions, however, I do not have a stable opinion on which one is better as these products are very different.

We previously used McAfee.

The setup is easy when using the web console. However, for on-premises deployment, it requires additional data and configuration.

We have a certified engineer with the necessary certifications to install, support, and troubleshoot Harmony Endpoint and Check Point firewalls.

Pricing is not within my purview as an engineer. However, if customers purchase it, I assume the price is reasonable.

I would recommend Harmony Endpoint to others.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have this at an enterprise level and we have it for all our endpoints. We use the product for disk encryption, anti-malware, and BPM blades.

The solution offers disk encryption, anti-malware, and BPM blades. For example, the Disc Encryption Software Blade is actually a part of this endpoint security solution. The whole thing is good for us.

The product has been proven 100% effective with us. We haven't had anything related to any threats passing to us for the past five years.

The solution is easy to use. It is self updated when there's a new version. It updates seamlessly, no matter what features you have. However, depending on what we use, there are some features that they will not apply in the clinics. We don't have the preview screen. We can customize it in a way that it doesn't disrupt our operation depending on if it is a laptop, it is a desktop.

The security is very good.

The solution is very straightforward.

The solution scales well.

We have found the stability to be very reliable. 

The solution is mostly very good. The reason why I'm trying to compare it with FireEye is due to the fact that it's supposed to be a mandate by the State. We are trying to justify the fact that we don't need to change our environment. For example, if the only thing that they want is to provide reports for the State, then that's a different story. We can customize the reports based on what they're asking for. We don't need to change or want to, however, the State may require us to.

Technical support can be a bit slow at times. 

We've dealt with the solution for ten years.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. Its performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The scalability of the product is very good.

The solution offers very good technical support. While they may be a bit slow, they always come through with a solution. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not a problem at all. 

I have no information in terms of the pricing. I'm not involved with neither the purchase, maintenance, contract, or anything that has to do with licensing.

The company may be interested in trying to change to FireEye. I'm looking at it now to see what differences and advantages are at play. 

We're just a customer and an end-user.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We've had no problems with it at all.

The primary use case is VPN.

It provides remote access for the staff and increases their productivity.

• Certificate management
• VPN

A couple of times, we experienced some sales issues.

The technical support is good.

The initial setup was moderately complex. We had to wait for it to do a few runs, back and forth, until it was solid.

We did the deployment in-house.

We have seen a measurable decrease in the hang times of the detector responses by five percent.

We had to protect our equipment inside and outside the perimeter network, regardless of where we were. Due to this need, we came to use Check Point Harmony Endpoint, which was extremely easy to deploy from the moment we logged in to the website. 

This solution is very user-friendly. After the Check Point tenant is created, it allows us to download the application for iOS or Windows, and it is only a matter of installing it so that the teams can start reporting to the Harmony Endpoint cloud. 

It came to provide us with security, reliability, and a centralized administration of unified services. It works regardless of whether you work on Mac or Windows systems, which are among the equipment we have in our organization. Today, our equipment is very diverse. However, we have managed to protect everyone with this solution. Check Point Harmony Endpoint provides support within the new organizational disruption trend of teleworking. With it, we manage to protect and manage all teams from a centralized policy. 

Its most valuable feature is being able to integrate cloud services and centralize the protection policy from a single administration dashboard. We are achieving uniform work that is easy to manage if any changes are necessary. Being able to give us an inventory of the equipment and the health status of everything from a single place has been great. This solution has become a great ally for the prevention of threats and security problems caused by viruses such as ransomware, and we are protected against threats, which is of great value. 

I would like to see this same solution being able to link with the services of different corporate networks as if they were a remote access VPN extension and thus not require additional licenses. We'd like to be able to integrate several products and services into one to be more efficient and user-friendly within the infrastructure. 

I've used the solution for one year.

We use it to manage our entire network and protect network traffic in terms of files that go out and come in. This protects our network between any platform we access or interactions between our clients and us. Also, it helps to monitor and block malicious applications, then it prevents these sites from accessing our stuff.

We use it for the endpoints and all the additional points which access the network in the organization. It protects everything across the board, from the server to the many other devices, like your phones and laptops. 

In terms of network usage, it actually reduced the amount of malicious attacks that we had. Before, we really didn't have a secure network. Each endpoint had to protect itself and probably most of them were not actually protected. Now, it's an entire process in which we've been able to cut down significantly the amount of malicious attacks by 60 percent that we get in the organization. It helps us to adequately monitor what has been going on with our network traffic and stopping individual attacks from accessing certain sites where we want to have restrictions or limitations.

The sandboxing feature: I like the entire process. It's one thing for it to detect, but another thing to have a remediation plan. It actually extracts out what we need to make it a clean file. 

There should be some way of managing this solution outside the organization's network, possibly with some type of remote access. For example, if I'm the admin of Check Point who manages the entire network, I would like to have access on my home device or maybe a mobile app to get reports, etc.

I have been using it since sometime from the beginning of last year.

It works just fine. I haven't experienced any issues.

It scales well. It accommodates all the endpoints that we have in our organization. As we grow, we do plan to increase usage.

We use it in our entire organization. Every staff person and device has access to the solution. We have approximately 250 endpoints. 

We have 10 IT managers and systems engineers directly working on it. I also work with the solution as a business analyst/developer.

The technical support is good. It is a straightforward solution. We have not really needed to call for anything because they train you on how to use this solution. You already have the IPS working and know how that works. It's not something that is complex.

We were previously using Sophos. We switched to Check Point because the pricing was much cheaper (by 25 percent).

The initial setup was straightforward. You're required to have some administrative training on how to use the solution. The deployment took between three to six months.

We worked directly with the vendor. The vendor had a partner in my region. Therefore, we worked directly with the partner, who was also working with Check Point. So far, the experience has been great. They were efficient. We have been able to achieve the reason why we set up and procured this solution.

We have seen ROI. It reduces malicious attacks and restricts users from accessing sites via our network.

As we grow, we've been given room to add additional licenses in terms of all our endpoints. 

In terms of licensing, have a buffer zone around your projects in terms of the amount of endpoints that you want to have. You can always have more, but it is best to leave room for a little increase or growth. 

The solution is too pricey.

We only evaluated Check Point and Sophos. There are only two really good cybersecurity solutions locally. You are either doing Sophos or Check Point. It is one or the other.

It is a great fit for any organization. I would rate the solution a 10 out of 10.

We use it for government utility billing, with all of our systems located in different places, working remotely as well. We also have an on-prem data center here in India. We have Check Point to cover all these things.

We used to have Fortigate, the firewall, and endpoints were only protected by an antivirus. We did not have threat management or ransomware protection. We upgraded to Check Point to get this kind of protection at the endpoint level. It covers firewall, availability, VPN, IP security, IPS, application control, URL filtering, antibot, antivirus, anti-spam, and sandblast threat emulation and extraction.

The entire industry may move to the cloud, where we don't have to worry.

The stability is good.

The scalability is there.

Their technical support is good.

We changed from Fortigate because we deal with public data, government data, utility billing. It is very important to maintain security to the greatest extent possible. We can't afford to lose data.

Our billing cycle that takes place periodically. If we miss something, lose data due to ransomware or the like, we are totally out or operation. We can't again continue the billing cycle in such a situation. It is subject to penalties imposed by the local state government.

The deployment was very simple. It took about 20 days.

We had help from a Check Point solution partner.

Check Point offered very good pricing through negotiation. The licensing is done yearly. We have a three-year subscription, including premium, direct support; the Next Generation and SandBlast are for two years. Our cost, including everything, is 18 lakh rupees.

Symantec is expensive so we did not go for it. Many solutions are equally good, you could go for any of them. Check Point offered competitive pricing and additional features. Symantec may be suitable for certain applications and certain data centers. But what we found over a period of time Check Point suits our purpose.

If you have a medium-size environment like ours, this solution should serve the purpose, although you may need different things. In security, one thing cannot suit everybody.

We have about 500 users of the solution. We don't have any immediate plans to increase our usage. Any increase would be at least two to three years in the future, given the type of environment and workloads that we have. 

We use it to help clients solve their security problems.

It helps clients have a better view of the risks. It also helps increase staff productivity by more than 50 percent, in my estimate.

The most valuable features are the innovations that they release in every version. The end-user facilities for managing the tool are also good.

I'm not sure what they are thinking about in terms of additional features at the moment, but I hope that they'll maintain focus on the tool to enhance the solution. 

Areas that have room for improvement are the scope of the product and, while I think the support is good, they can improve support as well.

It has a good level of scalability. They expand the solution with new and helpful features.

Technical support provides good solutions. They are available and respond quickly. They are knowledgeable.

Each scenario is different depending on the client's requirements or the regulations they need to follow or what they need to cover around risks.

The initial setup is easy, but because we are resellers we are trained in setting it up.

In addition to the standard licensing fees, there is a cost for support.

We have more than 70 products related to security solutions and we are resellers of many of them.

Consider the solution as one of your options because it's one of the top tools.

I rate this solution at nine out of ten because it covers what it needs to cover. As always, there is room to improve, but I think it's a good product.