Check Point Harmony Endpoint Reviews

There are many factors that make Check Point Harmony Endpoint as the main solution for our end-to-end system and data security of the organization. 

The primary use case of Check Point Harmony Endpoint, in our case, is to monitor every node against viruses and digital vulnerabilities, which keeps a 24/7 check over the happenings and keep us alerted against any unforeseen. 

The most important benefit of this solution has a single agent for security purposes and offers great stability during any heavy performance activity.

It has improved the overall security of our organizational digital well-being and made things and monitoring processes a lot easier and more straightforward. 

Integration with third-party servers and data endpoints and 24/7 background security checks are very useful for us and has been very instrumental phenomena in keeping things simple and secure for us. 

It has the ability to configure with any type of system and operating environment, which is great and makes it a more useful product for multiple business entities. 

The most important benefit of this solution is having a single agent for security purposes. 

Its stability during any heavy performance activity is excellent. 

It has improved the overall security of our organizational digital well-being and made things and monitoring processes a lot easier and more straightforward.

Integration with third-party servers and data endpoints and 24/7 background security checks are very useful for us and has been very instrumental phenomena in keeping things simple and secure for us. 

It has the ability to configure with any type of system and operating environment, which is great and makes it a more useful product for multiple purposes.

Overall, my experience with the product is great, and it's a perfect endpoint solution for multiple purposes. 

The solution can be made lightweight in order to keep the systems more effective during the background operations of the scanning and security checks. 

The user interface of reporting dashboard needs to improve for a better understanding of the end users and the administrators. 

The pricing of Check Point Harmony Endpoint can also be reduced. They are quite expensive at the moment. 

I've used the solution for two years.

We found it to be 99% stable and smoothly runs in the background.

It is a scalable solution and everything can be easily monitored, and data can be maintained.

Customer service is great and always helping us with quick solutions.

Positive

It was straightforward to set up and deployed over the cloud.

We implemented the solution via in-house teams.

We've witnessed a positive ROI.

It is a great cost with high-end Check Point features within reasonable cost brackets. You must try it.

Overall this is a great solution with a lot of benefits and ease of use. 

We use Check Point on our 500 computers to protect them from viruses and malware. The network is a protected local area network with limited connectivity to the internet. Not all computers are connected to the internet; only users with the necessity to connect can access it. We also increase the protection from viruses/malware by disabling USB ports for mobile storage. With all the protection steps taken, we still see that antivirus is a must to have as standard computer protection.

With all security steps taken to protect the network, viruses and malware still appeared in the network. Check Point Harmony Endpoint (endpoint antivirus) has helped our organization by preventing further damage to the computers and the network by detecting and taking appropriate action (quarantine, clean, delete) to viruses and malware. 

By doing this, our organization's business can maintain its operational state without any significant disturbance, and that is the most important thing to achieve.

Some of the most valuable features from Check Point include:

1. Its ability to run real-time scans in the background and detect all the malware and viruses while taking action to clean the system from the threat.

2. On-premise centralized management, so the client can do signature updates locally and save the internet bandwidth.

3. The reporting feature where we can see and monitor what happened on our client computers. For example, which client has out-of-date signatures, which client is infected by what virus, et cetera. 

Some areas of improvement could be :

1. Making the user interface on the server more intuitive and user-friendly. 

2. Making it easier for the user to do tuning and configuration to the server or the client application. For example, to turn off notifications, the user should be able to do that with some clicks on the user interface instead of searching and reading about how to do it in the knowledge base first and then trying to do it.

3. Our application version is quite old, and Check Point already released a newer version for endpoint protection, which includes a cloud version. After doing some trials, we see that Check Point already made many improvements to the features and user interface.   

I've been using the solution for five years.

Tthis solution runs with good stability.

If we deploy it on-premise, we should see the server hardware requirement first and match it with the number of clients we want to handle.

Customer service gave good support when we needed it. For example, when we need support on renewing the license or when we need to upgrade the client version, they have a quick response time to deal with the problem.

Positive

We did use a different solution previously. We switched as we want to use the same brand for our NGFW and our endpoint protection.

The setup was quite straightforward. We installed the server first and then made the client installer. If you have an active directory on the network, you can install it with push installation. That said, we don't have it, so we needed to install the client by accessing the client directly.

We implemented the product together with the vendor and an in-house team. The vendor team has good knowledge when it comes to implementing the product.

At the time we purchased it, the licensing was separated into some modules. There were antivirus modules, data protection modules, and full modules if I'm not mistaken. You should make sure that the module you choose fits your requirement. 

We evaluated the ESET antivirus.

Check Point has released their new product on endpoint protection, which includes a cloud version. You could try it for free to see if this product matches your needs before purchasing it.

It provides encryption for operating systems and protects browsers against malware, benefiting both new and old customers.

When using Check Point Harmony Endpoint, performance issues may occur, although not necessarily a ransomware attack. The endpoint might consume excessive resources from the machine, which can impact its performance.

We have partnered with Check Point Harmony Endpoint.

We have 25 endpoints using this solution.

Email support works fine, but it needs to be on the phone.

Positive

The deployment is not complex if you have to manage it. The installation can be done directly if the customer has a good knowledge of Microsoft systems. However, we have to install it manually, which can be difficult, especially when replacing all the old agents.

If the customer doesn't have an IP directory, we only put one person in it. We are deploying up to 1500 endpoints with only one person, maybe in two weeks. If the customer doesn't have an active directory and has 100-200 endpoints to install, we normally have to use three security engineers.

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

We have a particular case where today's endpoint provides complete security against ransomware. It runs effectively from work. It is about eighty to ninety percent effective.

The pricing is high because we lost several customers to Trend Micro and Symantec. Latin America and Columbia particularly have high prices. It was probably fifty percent more.

As a partner, Check Point provides us with the best protection. We can also arrange a demo or discussion to showcase the protection features and advantages to our customers.

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

With every new firewall that we're purchasing, we're deploying the SandBlast Agent. At the moment we're only running it on about 20 firewalls, just because the licensing isn't retroactive. What we need to do is produce a proof of concept to say, "This is the stuff we're getting." We're looking at it in a learning mode and then we can consider getting into a more aggressive mode of stopping everything. At the moment, we're trying to use it to give us information rather than to fully stop everything.

It's deployed on our physical firewalls, on-prem.

We have seen some attempted ransomware in our network. With the firewall we've already got IPS, but we wanted to integrate the endpoints into that as well. That's something we are seeing. Our IT risk team are getting those reports and seeing them and seeing fewer potential attacks.

It reduces potential downtime through ransomware by reducing risk. I don't think I would go to the CEO and say, "Hey, we've completely eradicated this and that," but it certainly complements other Check Point products that we have. It gives us some more information about what is happening and where it's happening on the network, on-prem, on the applicable firewalls. It's hard to say exactly what it has improved because it just works very well with what we've got. Certainly, with our Windows environment and our VPN, we do see a lot more. But I don't know if there's just more of a focus on the reporting, as a whole, that we're getting.

We have had previous ransomware attacks, and while we can't necessarily quantify any downtime or loss, there certainly was risk around that. This has reduced our risk in that environment. That's one of the big focal points. From a network operational point of view, could you ask, "Well, has it reduced things?" and the answer is "no," but from an IT-risk point of view, our IT risk team have certainly seen less impact from attacks. We're more proactive than reactive, compared to how we were doing things before.

We don't see it leading to a reduced number of security engineers. What we do envisage is information and empowerment. Rather than manually having to check this, that, and the other, we're looking at having these tools available and for them to produce actual results. We definitely see this tool helping us do that.

It's pretty complete for preventing threats to endpoints. Its capabilities are great.

The solution's automated detection and response capabilities are pretty good. It really depends on how aggressive we want to be with it. We've not deployed it in the most aggressive way you can, such as shutting down everything, because we've not deployed it in a greenfield site. It has not been deployed with that in mind. It has been deployed as an add-on service. As such, we don't want to be as aggressive as some top security firms would recommend we should be.

We do like the product, although there are quite a few things that we're asking our Check Point account team to enhance, where we think we probably could get more features from it.

We use a couple of Check Point products, like SmartEvent, and SandBlast Agent is not really integrated into that. We haven't gotten the reports working yet. We are working with the account team and trying. As I said, it's still relatively new in terms of what we're trying to achieve. We probably should have had more Professional Services come and help us. But, from our company's point of view, especially at this time in the market, the finances are just not there. But from what I've seen so far, I don't think there's enough integration into SmartEvent. That's something that I've asked our account team to try to focus on in the next versions or as an enhancement request.

Integration and deployment are probably the weakest points, and maybe service as well, although they are still at the high end. Would we go out to market and buy this on its own? Probably not, is the honest answer. But because it is a Check Point product and the licensing comes as part of it, it gives us this time to go and prove that, when it's together with all the other products that we have from Check Point, it certainly integrates very well. Would I go and buy this just as a standalone service if we didn't have Check Point firewalls? Probably not.

We're relatively new to Check Point SandBlast Agent, once they put it onto their firewall platform with the new environment. It comes built-in for the first year, including the cost. We've sampled it, starting about four months ago.

We had seen it work before. We had demos with it, but it was always something that seemed would be a nice feature to use, but not something the business wanted to buy into, per se. Now that it comes as part of the package for the first year, we thought we'd give it a go and see how it gets on.

I've had no problems from a stability point of view. It just seems to work.

It's definitely scalable. It's whether there is a business appetite. When we get a new firewall, we'll enable it and run it through the service. It's scalable to retrofit. We could do that and we could run that very easily, but that would involve a commercial spend, which at the moment, no one wants to do. We understand that, but the solution is certainly something that is of interest to various people.

If we get approval then it will move from a PoC to across-the-board. At that point, there would be between 100 and 200 people using it and thousands of agents. It could be scaled out to our whole organization. Again, it's funding-dependent.

We have Diamond Support, so it's very good, but we pay for the privilege. We have one engineer and a separate TAC team.

We had a solution but it wasn't really a similar solution. This is the first of its kind for us, for what it does. We do have antiviruses, so that the machines aren't just dead, and we do have our own hybrid package of something that, if you add four of them together, maybe adds up to half of this, but no similar package.

It's relatively easy to set up. There's plenty of documentation out there for how you do it. The way we've done it is probably the easiest way of doing it. We're not going all-out. We've gone with a small approach, mainly due to commercial reasons.

Our implementation strategy is just to switch it on in our new firewalls and see what happens, honestly. That's not always the best approach, but we switch it on in learning mode to give us information on what's out there and to see what we didn't know.

It took us about three weeks with the first two firewalls, and that doesn't include the firewall build time. That's just setting up everything else and the integration piece. There were two of us involved, me and a colleague. There were "dotted lines" into others, such as our IT risk team where we were asking, "Hey, is this what you want to see?" We're not really offering it as a full service, it's a PoC. If it goes live with a view to deploy it to all of our firewalls and all of our endpoints, I wouldn't say we would need any more people. It would be part of our operational team. The same is true for the risk team. I don't think we would need to get more people, although we see the IT risk team having more of an input.

We did it ourselves.  Potentially, if I had an open wallet and a blank cheque book, would we use a third-party? Yes, of course we would, but at the moment that option is just not there.

Return on investment would be not being attacked. Have we seen any? No. Has it identified certain things? Yes. The way we've got to look at return on investment is, all of a sudden we're less vulnerable to attacks. That's a hard measurement to define. Ultimately, not being attacked, and our reputation, is worth a lot more than just a dollar figure.

The cost-effectiveness of SandBlast is knowledge and understanding what is happening on our network. Do we have some infections? Are we seeing certain things which, without this tool, we would be exposed to? Yes, we are seeing that.

Licensing comes free in that first year or is included in the base package. From a commercial point of view, it really just is the renewal cost, rather than a one-time fixed cost or buy-in. That's for new firewalls. For existing firewalls, we haven't even gotten to that point yet. They don't even want us to look at the pricing. First, we need to think about what the product does. Does it do what it says on the tin? And if it does, then it's a commercial thing. We have quite a good commercial model with Check Point, so we don't really need to worry about that too much. The pricing should be good.

The licensing, the way they've changed it, is a positive and a negative. Ultimately, Check Point has changed how it operates and now we have to go back and retrofit.

If this does everything it says it does, I don't see any reason that we would use a different product, because this integrates so well with existing Check Point products.

What we've gained is more of an understanding of what's on our network. If I were to go and do this again from scratch, I probably would have looked to integrate more with our Check Point sales team and would have gotten more help from them.

My advice would be to involve your SE. He can help you through a lot more of the options when you deploy.

We don't use the solution’s Management Platform for the creation of virtual endpoint management services in the cloud. We haven't got to that cloud point yet. It's something we could do, potentially. We're going to work with our account team about that. But that's the one of the lessons learned: We did it by just playing around with it rather than doing a full deployment.

I would rate it at nine out of 10. What comes to mind is its effectiveness. Normally, I don't get involved in the costing too much. Is it doing everything that it said it was going to do? Yes it is, at the moment. Could it be enhanced more? Sure. But we have a relationship with Check Point and they do deliver on the RFEs for us. If we say we want it to do this, they'll get their engineering team looking at that.

I use it for end point protection, and I am also using full disk encryption Harmony both solutions are adopted. 

One of the advantages is the reporting functionality. For example, if some critical data is available on a laptop and the laptop gets stolen - I can remotely wipe it immediately. Because, at the end of the day, apart from the device, the data is important.

So, the zero-phishing feature of Harmony Endpoint, the one I have used, was very good.

Those features are very good. Then, zero-day protection is also very important to us.

We can map the MITRE attack framework along with the Cyber Kill Chain completely.

Sandboxing is a great functionality.

The only drawback is the integration process. For example, I want to integrate with my source platform. It took some time. That's the only concern regarding the integrations.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint doesn't have any XDR kind of solution. DLP functionality and all are not yet there.

And then, the performance also sometimes gets deep. CPU utilization could be further optimized. 

I have been using it for one year. 

I faced some issues with stability. Stability was good compared to other endpoint protection. The only thing is that in the Zero Phishing future, which I like a lot, we can see when people are entering password content and other things. Phishing is important.

Since it's a SaaS platform, we can upgrade only a license. We can get it.

I have experience with SentinelOne. SentinelOne has a feature; for example, if a ransomware attack happened and a particular file was affected, we can retrieve it. If some known files got corrupted, we can roll back the file to the last known good configuration. We can do that. 

But this particular feature is not there in Check Point Endpoint. And then, importantly, USB blocking on Linux machines is not currently available in Check Point Endpoint. It supports only the scanning part, but I don't think it is supporting USB blocking and device blocking.

DLP functionality and all, they are not yet there.

The installation is very easy. It takes around 20 minutes only. 

It requires maintenance. There are a couple of people who handle more than 4,000 endpoints. So if there are more, then I can publish them. That is a one-time activity. After that, only one person can monitor. The SOC analyst is only one guy. The person who manages the endpoint completely, email as well as the endpoint, both.

We have seen ROI. Time was saved. Since it's manual, we need to pay a lot to our team. The time-saving was very good. We can establish connectivity on each agent within 20 minutes.

The pricing is okay. It is in the enterprise range. It is not middle range. It is not so costly, but it is an enterprise.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

We use this solution for our desktops, laptops, servers, and selective mobile devices. It offers real-time protection against malware and other malicious threats is superb. 

Our previously used antivirus has not been able to identify certain threats. Check Point Harmony did it. That is a key highlight of this product. Check Point Harmony Endpoint includes a firewall component that allows us to enforce network security policies at the endpoint level, including application control, network segmentation, VPN enforcement, etc.

We can now see the performance of the computers. Previously, we used some other applications where we could see the CPU percentage go increasingly high. Compared to that, this solution is good. 

Check Point Harmony Endpoint helps us ensure endpoint compliance with security policies and regulatory requirements by enforcing configuration settings. 

Moreover, It provides visibility into endpoint activities and enables security teams to detect, investigate, and respond to security incidents in real-time. So business progress never gets disturbed. 

It monitors endpoint behavior in real-time to identify and block suspicious activities indicative of malware or malicious behavior. This proactive approach helps us a lot. 

It employs sandboxing technology to execute suspicious files in a controlled environment and analyze their behavior. This allows it to identify and block malware that may evade traditional detection methods by remaining dormant or obfuscated. 

More importantly, it is easy to install from the cloud. 

Simplifying the user interface and making it more intuitive can enhance usability; this is more beneficial for those who are new to the industry and lack knowledge about threats. 

Enhancements in compliance management and reporting capabilities could help organizations meet regulatory requirements more effectively and streamline audit processes. 

Continuously updating and enriching threat intelligence feeds and research capabilities can improve threat detection and prevention accuracy and effectiveness.

I've used the solution for over a year.

Check Point is a well established cybersecurity vendor with a long history of developing and maintaining security solutions. Harmony Endpoint benefits from this experience and is built on a solid foundation of technology and best practices. That i believe. 

The centralized management console enables efficient management of endpoint security across the entire organization, irrespective of its size. Administrators can easily configure policies, deploy updates, and monitor endpoint activities from a single interface, streamlining management at scale.

Customer service should be improved. 

Positive

Check Point Harmony has fould a suspicious file that the previous application did not discover (that file was in the system for a period as alogic bomps).

The initial setup was straightforward and easy.

We handled the setup in-house.

We've noted ROI in Risk Reduction and have noted:

• Productivity gains
• Compliance cost reduction
• Operational efficiency
• Security consolidation
• Incident response cost reduction

Compared to other service providers, the price is a bit high. That said, it is worth the price. 

We did evaluate McAfee and Norton. 

The solution is good, hence I'm more concerned about the pricing. It would be good if that can be been reduced. 

We were searching for a next-generation antivirus solution, and this was the best choice on the market.

We have 25 users who work from home and the office.

All computers have Windows Professional version 10 or 11 installed.

We implemented a policy in which every client (either PC or mobile) has to have the Endpoint protection software installed with all the available blades.

Our company's cyber security monitoring process includes centralized product monitoring. 

The product improved the overall security of our organization with the features like sandboxing and phishing prevention.

We have centralized monitoring of the security of the clients even if they are not connected to our VPN network.

The e-mail and office solution is a great add-on to our existing Office 365 protection on our company's e-mails.

I also have to mention that we did not have our mobile devices protected before the implementation of Harmony mobile. That was really the next step in securing our company's overall IT security.

The sandboxing is good. We didn't have any file ransomware attacks since implementation.

The phishing protection works. It prevented a lot of nasty situations with fake websites.

Using this solution in e-mail and Office, we recognized how many man-in-the-middle attacks have been started to get some credential information from our employees.

In mobile, we didn't realize before how much harm can be done from the mobile devices in the network.

It replaced the ESET solutions we used before in our company.

We need a higher maximum file size in the sandboxing feature.

Maybe the exceptions could be made much more understandable and easy to use.

There should be an option added to temporarily disable the protection of all or some blades for testing reasons.

The email and Office solution could have some options for exceptions, for example: don't scan e-mails sent to the local PDF scanner e-mail address.

Maybe an option to auto-upgrade the client version to the next stable release of the client software would be nice.

We have been using this solution for more then two years.

We didn't have any stability issues. We always use the stable releases of the client software.

The solution offers very good scalability.

So far, support is very good. I recommend them.

Positive

We used ESET, which was not satisfying.

It was straightforward.

We implemented through a local implementor.

The protection it gives to the clients is priceless.

Get in contact with your local Check Point solution provider to give you an offer regarding the implementation.

We evalute the Fortinet solution.

Harmony Endpoint is able to focus on the ZTNA for applications and in penetration testing for any type of ransomware or man-in-the-middle attacks. 

It helps to protect and secure endpoints, helps to focus on incidents, and prioritizes vulnerabilities. The solution also helps with endpoint protection and recovery from an autonomous response and in conforming to the organization's policy. It helps to do SSL traffic encryption and packet sniffing and has a good way for mobile threat management and defense as well. 

Security across the workspace has been the primary use case. 

Our organization was able to use the analytics and report information to figure out any risk exposure in a remote workspace of mobile and VPN access and email and endpoint security. 

Endpoint analytics helps to showcase any of the gaps that are there with the downloads, attacks on malware, and how to triage incidents. 

It helped to improve upon sensitivity of the data with the data loss prevention technique as well. And stopping any vicious attacks is the priority by making sure any advanced ways of detection come about.

I found the fact of working across multiple attack vectors easy and more beneficial. 

It has helped with USB to human errors to website issues to all types of threats and bot attacks. 

I also found the features of provisioning a VM for some security requirements and the fact of access across SSH and remote terminals also beneficial. 

Client-based access and the suite of products from SaaS API and Browser Protection are also very beneficial. It follows the ZTNA which tells that the VPN model of security would come to be obsolete in a few years with the Harmony benefit of Check Point.

More development in Linux may help, however, the fact that the product could also have some more documentation as suggestions on what to do may also help.

The product may take some time to navigate at first but apart from that the log ingesting and working on getting a client installed may take some time. 

I would like to see more automation. 

Also, encryption management is not made available in all versions but if it could be extended that would be great. Sometimes it may take some slight delay, however, it's nothing too bad. 

I have been using this solution for three years.

We did not use a different solution previously.

I'd advise new users to work with a technical account manager and follow the steps in the documentation.

We evaluated ZScaler.