Check Point Harmony Endpoint Reviews

The first use case is to detect malware as well as advanced threat protection for known, unknown, and zero-day malware, sandbox emulation and extraction, and enhanced by automated endpoint forensics analysis. 

Zero-day attacks are a risk for the company which seemed very important to us, plus the sandbox in the cloud. We have a cloud console that is easy to use and easy to monitor.

The details of our environment are Harmony Endpoint Advanced for 100 on-premise users with cloud managment console, and support for one year.

It has improved the detection of malware. We are very satisfied with the friendly and easy-to-monitor console. We chose the advanced version as it seemed very important to have advanced threat protection for known, unknown, and zero-day malware plus sandbox emulation and extraction, enhanced by automated endpoint forensics analysis.

At the moment we are very satisfied and confident with Check Point.

All of these features quoted below are valuable for us, as the set of solutions is what makes the solution really valuable. 

• Endpoint Threat Prevention features
• Web Protection (malicious sites/URL Filtering)
• Anti-Ransomware
• Anti-Bot
• Anti-Exploit
• NGAV
• Anti-Virus
• Forensic collection and automated reports
• Threat Hunting
• Sandbox Emulation and Extraction (CDR)
• Endpoint Access Control Features
• Endpoint Firewall
• Application Control
• Port Protection
• Endpoint Compliance
• Remote Access VPN

If we had to choose one, we really like the EDR included.

The Check Point Harmony Endpoint is a very complete solution. Even in the most basic version, it already includes EDR, which today is very important and something that all endpoint solutions should consider having from the most basic versions. We would like to have one more step and that's to give and have full-disk encryption.

Compared to other brands, we would like a dedicated anti-spam to be included in order to close the full circle. We could have it with Check Point Endpoint, mobile, cloud, or firewall. An all-in-one console would be great.

I've been using the solution for six months.

The stability has been positive.

The scalability has been positive.

We did not have any problems. We got good solution training

Positive

We did not previously use the solution.

We had a positive experience with the implementation via a vendor. 

Our ROI has been positive.

If you need the on-premise management console, you have to pay an additional cost. It's not much, however, it's good to ask for a quote.

We also looked into Sophos.

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.

We use it for multiple purposes. It's for securing the endpoints. We have about 200 endpoints added to this solution and being maintained. Its server is cloud-based and here our in-house IT team takes care of the installation and configuration on endpoints. We are required to secure our endpoint from any external attacks. It's also well controlled so that only required access is to be given to end-users. Whether it's about blocking unwanted websites or port blocking, we use the solution to manage everything.

The anti-malware and port protection, etc., are good. We have about 200 endpoints on this solution being maintained. We like that its server is cloud-based and that our in-house IT team can handle the installation and configuration on endpoints. It's great for securing our endpoints from any external attacks. We can control access to end-users. 

Tech Support must be better. Whenever we log a case for any issue it takes too much time to get it sorted. There should be escalation by default. If the case is not being sorted quickly, it must get internally escalated to the team who are experts and they should be empowered to jump in to get the issue fixed. Many times, we have to be on it for weeks to come to a proper resolution. 

Website blocking and endpoint levels are still a challenge and there needs to be a more sophisticated solution. We are looking forward to having this product work more efficiently.

We have been using Harmony Endpoint for over six Months.

Tech Support needs improvement.

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 use the solution for many things. We don't only use it as an Endpoint client for antivirus. It is used for our next-generation antivirus. We are also using Harmony on other things, for example, our email. There's a Harmony email and office solution, which we also are using in order to protect our email.

The fact that everything is centralized is great. For example, the management is centralized on one portal in the cloud. 

We like the fact that we have a lot of visibility with this solution and the protection is very good. I have seen cases where customers, get attacked by ransomware and it is very easy for Check Point to restore a file that has been compromised with ransomware. It's 100% effective. 

They are developing new technologies. For example, they added SASE to their portfolio with Harmony. They also have Infinity SOC. If one of the Harmony Endpoints gets compromised, Check Point Infinity SOC is going to see it, and it's going to highlight that.

They're on the very edge of technology and are very fast with implementing new technologies. 

The solution is very stable.

They have a great knowledge base that you can leverage as a user.

The product scales well. 

Technical support is knowledgeable and responsive.

Every now and then, every vendor does have a vulnerability that is discovered. For example, when many vendors were using open SSL, they had to do some fixes on their software in order to fix that particular vulnerability. Check Point was the first one to fix that. It's clear that, unlike the competition, it is always keeping up with the patching of its own software.

We'd like it if the solution continued to add new features. For example, what would be specifically useful to us is a feature that allows threat hunting. They may be already working on that or have something available, however, we need something robust and effective.

I'm not sure if they need to improve anything right now. They are already developing new aspects that are quite innovative. 

The only thing that our customers want, is lower prices. 

I've been using Check Point for 18 years.

The product is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We have found the solution to be very easy to scale. If you need to expand it you can do so.

They have good technical support. They have very knowledgeable people, depending on the solution. Some specialize in Harmony Endpoint. It's very good.

The initial setup is very easy. The management is on the cloud, and therefore, you practically don't have to do any installation. You only log in and then you begin to use it and you begin to deploy on your network, the endpoints. The time it takes to deploy depends on the size of endpoints you have. With a small network, such as 100 endpoints, you can do it in one day or a couple of hours. 

But they are a leader in detecting threat, therefore, it's reasonable that they are a little more expensive than some other competitors. However, customers always want to pay a bit less.

We are a reseller.

My advice to new users would be to reconsider installing administration servers on-premise. The cloud solution can do it. It's going to lower the maintenance costs. Also, if you are on-premises, you often need some sort of expert on-side, whether it's a vendor or someone else - especially if you are upgrading. That requires knowledge. In contrast, on the cloud, everything is done for you. They have a high availability network so that when you upgrade the servers can keep up. You can upgrade without downtime if you choose the cloud. 

I would rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

We have many clients using this solution for different use cases.

The solution can be deployed on the cloud and on-premise.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint is mainly used for protection. 

The most valuable feature of Check Point Harmony Endpoint is centralized management.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint could improve by allowing it to work on older systems by reducing the system requirements. Since our systems are dated we can only use the antivirus module features.

I have been using Check Point Harmony Endpoint for approximately two years.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint is very stable.

The scalability of the Check Point Harmony Endpoint is good. It can scale easily.

We have some clients with 10,000 users that are using this solution.

I have opened up many tickets with the support and they have been responsive. I have not had any problems with them. They have helped whenever I faced a problem.

I rate the support from Check Point Harmony Endpoint a four out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of the Check Point Harmony Endpoint is easy. We use the main policy for the installation across the organization.

We have had some problems with connection management because if we install the initial client on the computer, we cannot stop or delete this client or install the full package afterward.

If we have a new signature technical support ticket, they add this signature to the database in three to five days which they could improve.

I rate the initial setup from Check Point Harmony Endpoint a four out of five.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint does not have some features that SentinelOne or CloudStrike has.

I rate Check Point Harmony Endpoint a seven out of ten.

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.