It is a typical firewall that has been implemented in most of our regions. We use it for normal firewall policies and VPNs.
We are mainly using Check Point firewalls. We also have a few Check Point cloud security programs.
It is a typical firewall that has been implemented in most of our regions. We use it for normal firewall policies and VPNs.
We are mainly using Check Point firewalls. We also have a few Check Point cloud security programs.
Everything can be managed from a single dashboard nowadays.
Since we upgraded to R.80 from our previous R.77 version, the activity of my team has improved a lot. We don't have to open multiple consoles or go to multiple nodes. Even though we are managing multiple solutions of Check Point, they feel similar to us now.
The most valuable feature is the Check Point Management Server, especially version R.80 onward. We can manage everything. We have endpoint security, cloud security, and email security. Everything can be managed from a single management server, making this a very unique and easy solution to use in the market now.
From a technical perspective, it is an easy solution to use. Everything seems perfect. We are not using all of its features, like sandboxing.
The main thing for a normal operations guy who is creating tools and firewalls, it is quite difficult to manage. It requires an expert level of knowledge in Check Point products to manage these scalable platform appliances and the virtual firewall that comes with it. We have to educate our guys and give them training on a regular basis to work on these products. Otherwise, it's fine.
About five years.
It is pretty stable. It hasn't caused many issues over the years, unlike normal network issues. They do release bug fixes at least once a month. We keep very good track of that and update the patches regularly, but we haven't run into bigger issues so far. So, I'd say it is quite stable.
The firewall is very easy to use and hasn't caused much trouble for us over the years.
From a scalability perspective, they have a solutions like Check Point Maestro. Therefore, it is easy to upscale nowadays.
We have over 200,000 end users.
They should improve the support a bit. Though they have expert engineers in tech, sometimes the amount of time to get back a solution for an issue is more than what is acceptable, even though it is a high priority.
During a scheduled activity or an implementation, they find their highest level of support. During an implementation, I never faced an issue with the support. I would rate them a nine out of ten for this.
The company has been using Check Point firewalls for the past 10 years. Before that, they used Cisco ASA.
Mostly, I have worked on Check Point products. Therefore, the initial setup was straightforward. It was not that complicated.
I can spin up a firewall and put it in production within an hour. If it's a migration from a different solution or upgrading an existing management solution, it might take some time because of the planning. There are a lot of things that have to be a part of the implementation or migration activities.
We do it ourselves most of the time. We only take help when it comes to scalable platforms, like big chassis firewalls, which are little complicated. Then, we get outside help.
I manage the operations team and have also been involved as a consultant.
We have some best practices in place that we follow.
There are four security engineers who deploy and maintain this solution.
Comparatively, Check Point pricing is a little high. However, if you have that budget, I would recommend anybody to go with Check Point.
For cloud security purposes, we looked at FortiGate. In the end, we decided to go with Check Point. Primarily, we went with Check Point because of the fee. We also already had expertise on Check Point and the team is comfortable around it. We like that Check Point has a single dashboard. Feedback from peers suggests that the support in India for NGFWs is not as good with other vendors as it is at Check Point.
Get a team who has expertise on this product and educate your team. Give them training. If Check Point is using a new version, make sure your team is aware of that. If there are any changes, let them know and make them comfortable working around this product because we have had some issues due to lack of expertise.
If you don't have an expert in-house team for implementation, I would strongly recommend getting help of the Check Point professional services team. There are a few third-party operational services, but I would go with Check Point professional services.
We are planning to increase our usage of the solution. Every project that we take on has Check Point security products as part of the solution.
I would give this solution an eight out of 10 because of the support. They take too much time when they should give you a result.
We primarily use the product to block traffic at the application layer, limiting access to YouTube and social media during busy periods while allowing it during lunchtime or office hours.
The product's primary benefits include effective intrusion blocking and improved network management.
I appreciate the support provided as well. It is highly reliable and has a prompt response time.
The system's operation could be enhanced. I recommend developing a management console that can more efficiently handle multiple Check Point devices, as we have multiple appliances across different sites.
We have been using Check Point NGFW since 2016 for approximately eight years.
There are occasional issues, but they are typically resolved with subsequent updates. I rate the stability a six out of ten.
We have three sites where we use Check Point NGFW. The first site has about 1000 users, the second site has between 800 and 900 users, and the third site has approximately 100 to 200 users.
I rate the product scalability as two out of ten. Improvement is needed as it could be more convergent, particularly for on-premises solutions.
We are currently using Check Point, Palo Alto, and Cisco.
Check Point's advantages include its lower cost than Palo Alto. However, it requires maintenance of many parts, as it is only partially GUI-based. In contrast, Palo Alto is mostly GUI-based, simplifying operations for our IT security team.
The setup process was straightforward. Some aspects in terms of maintenance are easier due to the GUI-based interface.
We took help from a consultant for implementation.
I recommend Check Point Firewalls. It is a solid product with reliable support and frequent updates.
I rate it an eight.
The product is an excellent perimeter firewall solution. But compared to Palo Alto, the management console is critical. It's difficult to let customers understand the dashboard of the firewall because there are three distinct dashboards. The three dashboards include smart connect, Check Point Firewall dashboard and more.
The solution is used by our organization for security purposes across small and medium banks in our country, who happen to be customers of our company.
The architecture of the solution is extraordinary because when a Check Point Firewall protects a customer or organization, a DDoS attack can hardly occur. Another valuable feature is the real-time zero-day protection.
The user interface needs to improve and should be user-friendly. The customer of this solution also needs to undergo training to use the solution dashboards, unlike products like Palo Alto.
In the next release, Check Point can try to add the DDoS or web application firewall within the overall firewall. If Check Point is able to implement the aforementioned integration within the firewall module, then people don't need to buy each firewall separately. The comprehensive firewall addition will increase the sales volume of any next generation firewall because TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) will be low.
I have been using Check Point NGFW for five years.
I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.
If you have the Maestro version, scalability is the best among all competitors. For large organizations that have ten thousand users, they don't need to bother about the extra cost of the Maestro version. For organizations with one or two thousand users, the Maestro version can be a luxury for them.
The tech support is very helpful for Check Point NGFW. The support team even asks for remote access to resolve the problem immediately. But sometimes, it takes between eight to twelve hours to connect with a level three engineer to get the support. The response time needs to improve. I would rate the tech support a six out of ten.
A firewall is a critical asset, and when there is a problem with the perimeter firewall, an individual cannot communicate outside the organization, so support is required immediately.
Neutral
Our company's usual deployment model for the solution is on-premises because cross-border data transmission is prohibited. The installation of Check Point NGFW takes between seven to ten days (working five hours a day). For the banks who are customers of our company, we could only work for deployment after the usual banking hours, so it took longer.
I can conclude that deployment and running the User Accessibility Test (UAT) can take a maximum of forty hours. Two engineers are needed to deploy Check Point NGFW.
I have evaluated SentinelOne and CrowdStrike. The rollback feature of ransomware attacks in SentinelOne cannot be found in competitors.
I would recommend Check Point NGFW over Palo Alto and Cisco as a complex security solution for a complex environment. I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.
We use the solution to configure sandboxing features for enterprises. We also use it for policy-level configurations and VPNs.
Sandboxing is the most valuable feature. A majority of the configurations are very accurate. We can find what an organization's user is downloading from the internet.
The support team should be faster.
I have been using the solution since 2016.
All products have some bugs. However, we had a minimum bug experience with Check Point. I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.
The product is scalable. Everyone in our company uses the product. We are 100 users. We have an on-premise firewall. We use it every day.
I have contacted the support team. I have had good conversations with the engineers. Sometimes, it takes a little bit of time to solve some issues. If it's a complex issue, we need to start from scratch and escalate to a bigger tier of support.
Positive
The initial setup is very easy.
The product is not that expensive for what it is offering, but it could be cheaper. Nowadays, all the vendors are increasing their prices. Suggesting the product to the customers will be easier if it is a little cheaper. The tool offers good attributes.
Palo Alto is also a good vendor. We chose to go with Check Point as well for our enterprise solution as distributors, and we suggest it to our customers.
I was an engineer for AT&T. I helped customers with configurations. The vendor is taking care of the user side of security with Check Point Harmony. It is a very good product. Check Point Harmony must provide administrators the ability to manage external programs remotely. Some customers want such features, and other vendors provide them. I would recommend the solution to others. The vendor has been investing a lot of money and effort to prevent zero-day attacks. Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.
We have different cloud platforms within the organization and needed a solution that would allow us to control different aspects of them from one single platform, which has allowed us to manage and apply policies across all different locations.
It has allowed us to be more efficient with compliance and maintenance of all different platforms; management of the users is now tighter, and fewer resources have to be invested in applying all the needed policies and levels of access based on company roles.
The product provides a full security posture for our cloud environment. We get complete visibility of all the workload hosted across all different platforms and all traffic coming in/ out of these cloud platforms. These policies are on 24/7 from any device, say desktop, laptop, mobile, etc.
All this is pretty easy to set up and notifies any anomaly as soon as it arises for immediate attention/ correction; some of these issues will be addressed automatically and just let you know it was identified and solved.
The management console offers excellent visibility of all security options and configurations, also showing all the traffic from each user.
Once you're working on a specific action, the interface will pop relevant information around past actions contradicting the new policy, showing you strictly where potential threats may come from.
Admins and executives are more at ease with the compliance engine within the software as it measures how many of the security requirements we're compliant with, making their work much more accessible from that standpoint.
This is something that doesn't directly affect us. However, I know VMware is not supported by the platform.
Also, it seems that plenty of features you may not know even exist unless you do some extensive, deep digging as they're not coming up in the initial configuration, so you have to go through the documentation to realize their existence.
Support is really good, so you may rely on them to learn more about these coded features I'm talking about, also to make the proper calibration for the rules/policies you're applying as they may not turn the results expected from the first config.
We've used the solution for +2 years now.
I have been using this solution as a perimeter firewall.
Our organization has ISP-based DDoS protection on the outer attack surface. Then, we have Check Point Next Generation Firewall with an IPS module as a second layer of protection. And then, we have Check Point Access Control, Application, and URL filtering, anti-virus, and anti-bot modules enabled. We also have the cloud-based Check Point Threat Emulation solution and different segmentations on Check Point Firewall as a DMZ zone, internal zone, and external zone. Our internal zones have different segments to improve our security level. We apply it by dividing our network into different VLANs by using the Check Point solution.
Check Point is the first vendor in which we found the stateful firewall terminology. It is always on the top of the list of best firewall solutions.
Financially, the benefit of Check Point is very high when I compare it with an average firewall solution. At the end of the day, the benefits it provides are already higher than I paid.
Our business performance is already doubled by the help of Check Point. If we need to talk about efficiency of administrators while managing a security solution, I consider it as one of the most important item.
Thanks to Check Point, our security team can easily handle different problems in time.
Check Point gateway and management installation are very easy. After the console-based installation steps, you can continue on the web GUI interface. This is very valuable. It doesn't let you make a simple mistake, which might be a reason to install all the systems from the beginning. It has been designed to give you flexibility as much as needed; not more, not less. It prevents human mistakes, basically.
If I have to say just one thing as the most valuable; I will say it is the most reliable firewall solution in the world. It is easy to prove that when I compare the number of CVEs which are published in a year among firewall vendors.
The routing rules and some more network settings should be listed on the Check Point Smart Console instead of GAIA Web GUI. It might be a little bit confusing when an administrator remembers the location of the settings. Also, it is hard to manage the settings by always jumping from GAIA Web-based graphical user interface to Java based Smart Console dashboard. Also, Check Point Next Generation Firewall has a very detailed and well-organized CP view on the console on both CLISH and expert (/bin/bash) shells; which gives an administrator a real-time monitoring option on the console.
I have been using it for more than six years.
On a heavy load, I haven't experienced packet loss or inconsistent behaviors.
In the beginning, I would consider Check Point solution as not scalable enough. However, after Maestro architecture, it is extremely scalable now. The organizations does not have to pay a lot of money to plan for the next 2-3 years. They are flexible enough to allow for the extension of their systems by adding another module like a blade.
The customer service and support team respond in minutes. If it is a critical issue, you can reach them in seconds via chat.
Positive
I used Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls before. From Fortinet to Palo Alto it was a big change.
Fortinet was not a good enough solution as compared to PA. Then, due to finances and some other reasons, I switched to the Check Point and it was one of the best decisions in my life.
The initial setup is straightforward. You just need to define disk allocation for logs and system files and backup files as an amount. Then you can continue with Web GUI to set up network, DNS, etc. settings. Then you complete your setup by installing the Smart Console interface.
The Check Point support team is one of the best. When I need them, they can escalate the ticket to an appropriate level of engineer to fix the problem.
As a security solution in this kind of market, prestige and being reliable cannot be measured with money. It costs more than a million dollars to have a defacement attack. The costs to prevent this kind of attack cannot be measured with money, in my opinion.
I'd advise others to worry about changing their firewall habits from any vendor to Check Point. It will be one of the best decisions of their life. If you have time and money to take care of other vendors, go ahead. However, if you are smart enough to manage your money and time, don't be afraid to give a chance to Check Point solution.
I did get some PoCs from other vendors such as Sophos and some other firewall vendors which are focused on small-size organizations mostly.
I recommend to all system managers and security administrators to try all the enterprise firewall solutions. Then, most likely the final decision will be to use the Check Point Next Generation firewall.
The main use of the Check Point NGFW in our organization is the protection of all of our on-site infrastructure. This includes all network elements, physical and virtual servers, end-user equipment, and all other elements that may be linked in the future within our infrastructure.
The product is provisioned in a virtualized environment with the purpose of expanding resources whenever required and generating high availability of the services it offers us, both in the protection of applications through application control and the other blades that make up this solution.
The Check Point Next Generation Firewall solution has allowed us to improve our protection scenario as it is above other products that we have known. It allows us to easily update against the latest security vulnerabilities and has also allowed us to have the opportunity to analyze unexpected behavior in files and applications.
In addition, the constant improvement in the new versions allows us to include better features in the administration and ease in its configuration and allows for the possibility of obtaining important data through the reports that it generates.
The most valuable aspects of this product include:
1. Scalability. It has allowed us to grow in a safe way and in accordance with our particular needs.
2. Support. The attention of both the distribution channels and the manufacturer has allowed us to count on the help needed in critical moments and in an easy way.
3. All in One. This product contains all the services we require for the protection of our entire infrastructure, including also end-users who are most vulnerable.
At the product and service level, I consider that it is within all the expectations that every organization has and each version includes functionalities that you may not have imagined, however, I do believe that they could improve in two aspects:
1. Administration Console. We need to be able to transfer the administration console to a web environment that does not require the installation of a client. On some occasions it is possible, due to specific needs, to have to do it from another computer or from a cell phone.
2. Protection of Web Applications. In our particular case, we have different web applications developed by the same organization, however, that requires a specialized protection element such as a WAF. Having this service or feature within the same solution would be very valuable.
We have been using this product for more than six years.
We use the product as our main and only Firewall/Gateway/VPN Gateway. we are in the finance sector, and we need a very reliable and robust system.
We rely heavily on the VPN system, as most of our employees are working outside the office at this time.
We also have two appliances to improve reliability, we have internet access through two ISPs configured to work simultaneously.
Our internal LAN is with duplicated network nodes that are double connected to our Check Point cluster. That way, we have full High Availability.
Before our purchase of Check Point products, we used an open-source product that lacked good integration between products and setting up to work was very tricky.
We use the Check Point mobile VPN, which is very stable and easy to use. It allows our employees to change their internal domain password when it becomes old, even when they are outside of the office for a long time. The VPN client can connect to our internal network even before the user is logged into his laptop. This allows users to receive GPO policy updates.
The solution offers very good central management, which saves time and is hassle-free.
One of the most useful new feature is dynamic definitions. For example, if you need to allow all of the Microsoft Azure IP addresses, you can insert them dynamically and Check Point will update them for you. Without it, to find all IP addresses would be almost impossible.
You can create additional layers for the firewall rules. This allows better organization and performance of the product by skipping to the rules that are responsible for this group of protected devices.
There are some GUI features in Check Point's SmartConsole that are still from the old versions and are in separate/duplicated interfaces; it would be most useful if it is integrated and not on different menus.
We would like to have a better search engine on the checkpoint.com site. Right now, it is difficult to find, for example, a newer version of the Check Point VPN Mobile client. The search engine shows most visited sites and the newer version won't be the most recently viewed site page. As it is right now, you have to find the general VPN page form, and from there you have to look at what version of the product you need and then go to the page of the latest version.
We have been using this product for five years.
Check Point is very stable.
We haven't needed to expand our throughput capacity.
However, based on the Check Point documentation, it is hyperscale ready capable of up to 475 Gbps of Threat Prevention.
It is very good. Our local representatives are very helpful.
Positive
We moved from a previous solution to Check Point as it is more reliable and easy to manage, and our old solution wasn't able to provide the level of security we desired.
We have had some problems understanding how to set up HA, however, we managed to do it. This was mainly due to the fact that we didn't have experience with Check Point products in the past.
We did everything in-house.
New users should know that the first year of support is included in the equipment. After that, you have to buy it.
We choose between Palo Alto and Checkpoint.
We like it. It works well.