Check Point NGFW Reviews

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.

We use our Check Point NGFW firewall mainly for perimeter security. Those firewalls are placed at many sites distributed over Europe. We love the firewall management and think it's still the golden standard for creating a rule base and we go more and more in the direction of identity bases user access to secure our environment.

The other firewall blades, such as Anti-Bot, Application and URL-Filtering, and IPS, are used on all sites. It's easy to deploy, as the firewall is able, with the latest version, to learn from the traffic and adapt the IPS policy.

Check Point NGFW has improved our organization with more security and easier deployments. There is a smaller amount of workload in the supporting area. We find a lot of documentation for the products and benefit from a big community. The Check Point support is much better than what we have seen from other vendors. The firewall policy is easy to deploy and we can do a more granular separation of specific user groups. We feel much more secure with this product - especially the API support - and possible automation has saved us a lot of time in our team and organization.

The most valuable features are the identity-based access and high-quality intrusion prevention functionalities. 

One of the most valuable aspects is the central management, which includes a large wide range of API calls. With the central management, we can define a reasonable security policy for many sites and not only for network segments but for user and AD groups. This gives us a bit more "Zero Trust" in our network.

It's enabled us to move away from basic LAN to LAN segmentation to a more powerful user separation approach.

One area which is still lacking is the site-to-site VPN solution. This is still an area that could be improved, although the features have gotten much broader and I really have seen an improvement over the last 10 years of working with the product. The separation from encryption domains between the tunnels came recently as a new feature to the product. This really helps a lot. Yet, we are still seeing a lack of compatibility with other devices, even though this is the case with many vendors. Especially with IKEv2, we are struggling with many vendors to set up perfectly running tunnels.

I'm working with Check Point for 10 years.

If you go by best practice recommendations from Check Point the stability is very good.

Scalability is really good. Check Point has the Maestro solution, where you can really scale easily without wasting resources.

They are really anxious to solve issues as fast as possible. They also try to get in actual contact with you via phone or chat to fully understand the issue.

Positive

In some areas we were using Cisco, however, we changed to Check Point to centralize things.

The setup is pretty straightforward, at least for the basic setup. Even with more complicated configurations, you have good support and experts at Check Point in the background that can help.

We did it ourselves.

Check Point is definitely not the cheapest solution, but the better security makes it worth the price. The licensing model is pretty easy, especially when it comes to the extension for many environments.

We looked at Cisco, Barracuda, and Fortinet.

I'd advise teams to give it a try!

We use a remote access VPN, and this is a perimeter firewall for our data center to secure our servers and internal applications. We are using model G-6600.

Check Point is awesome from a security standpoint. Based on our experience and also the experience of the other customers, it is a very stable appliance.

It should be user-friendly from an implementation point of view. Its setup is a little bit difficult.

I have been using this solution for four years.

From a security standpoint, it is very stable, and I would rate it a nine out of 10. I don't have any issues with it.

At present, we have 30 for our distribution. So, it is pretty scalable.

Their support is good. Their L1 and L2 support across the globe is great. L3 support is with the Israel team, and they have the right competency to troubleshoot it. Sometimes, when something needs to be done in the software in detail, we need to wait for people to come online from Israel. I would rate their L3 support a six out of 10 because we need to wait for the team from Israel to come online.

It is a little difficult to set up. We need a really skillful engineer to manage it. After we have onboarded it correctly, it is very easy to manage, and it is very secure. Initially, we had some challenges and issues, and when we got the right resource and support from the vendor, they all got resolved. It took four or five days.

It should be user-friendly from an implementation point of view. I would rate it a six out of 10 in terms of implementation.

I would recommend this solution. From a security standpoint, Check Point is the best product, but a customer should have the right skillsets to onboard and manage this.

I've been working with multiple customers in India, and I don't see any specific features that they need. It has covered pretty much everything.

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of 10.

We use Check Point for VPN access for all employees, as a rule. We also used it as a filter, a firewall, and it's the front line of our access to the Internet.

It has VPN access for our employees and it controls access, barring intrusion for non-authorized access.

The URL filter is activated to filter access to our employees. We use filtering for VPN access.

The configuration is one of the best features of this product.

When this product was purchased approximately 12 years ago it was the top of the line.

The product has been working very well.

I don't have any issues with the software of this solution. It works as is expected.

I would like to see more integration with other infrastructures. We are considering Cisco because it is more integrated, and the network limits of the solution are better.

Recently, we experience a problem with the hardware because it was too old, it was blocked. The hardware failed, but the software did not. With older hardware, it is a problem because our network is growing every year. The solution is not at maximum performance. 

It does not have the performance that we require. The network is not the same as it was 12 years ago. There are several logs.

We are looking for a cheaper product that is more integrated than our Cisco Network appliance.

It may also need to support other types of architecture.

The only reasons we are looking at other solutions are price and integration.

Check Point was installed in the company approximately 12 years ago.

The stability is good.

We are a company with 1,200 employees, and approximately 700 are using this solution.

We have five HP Servers, and we have a cluster in different geographic locations. 

Check Point has been installed in an HP-certified server. It is not an appliance, it is an HP Server.

We have one or two professionals who work on the platform.

It is not a cheap solution, which is why we are looking for another one.

We are currently evaluating new firewall solutions because the Check Point that we have was installed approximately 12 years ago, and wanted to change to a next-generation firewall.

The HP Server works fine without any maintenance, but it needs to be taken care of. We did not, which caused a disk to fail. We have one or maybe two that are working. I don't have any complaints about the HP Server. It was sized for that network load at that time.

I would rate Check Point a ten out of ten. It works as expected.

In today's world, we can't completely rely on traditional signature-based devices, as technology involving cyberattacks is becoming more sophisticated. We require an all-in-one solution that can defend against newly-created attacks, necessitating the usage of NGFW firewalls. This is where Check Point comes into the picture.

Our environment contains multiple roaming users, where we have to extend trust beyond the organizational network. Not only is there east-west traffic to deal with, but a large volume of north-south traffic, as well. We are required to monitor all of the traffic, which includes many branch offices connected centrally.

Monitoring Data via DLP in such a scenario, we require a single solution, which is nothing but Checkpoint.

It has not only improved our environment but the entire organization. Adopting it brings better functionality.

Starting from the basic firewall blade to sandbox threat emulation and threat extraction, it works seamlessly to protect against both known and unknown malware.

After the version 80.xx migration, Check Point stability and security have improved tremendously.

Through the management server, it has become very easy to manage the configuration for each of the blades, as well as the day-to-day operations. With central management, it has become possible to manage endpoint devices as well.

Check Point has the best technical support, which I feel if we consider other firewall vendors in the market, is an important distinguishing point.

Stateful inspection is one of the strongest points in this product, which is applicable while creating policies for application and URL filtering.

Check Point provides dedicated blades to monitor network traffic, which helps while troubleshooting network and packet-related issues.

It is easy to filter traffic based on source-destination services, time, etc, which is an enhancement over other firewalls in the market.

Check Point fulfills our requirements but it is important that they stay on top of competitors by addressing certain points.

There are issues with stability while upgrading devices with hotfixes. For example, many times, a device will stop giving responses after an upgrade (observed in 80.10 release).

The rule database needs to be improved because when we apply rules for the destination, based on service and application and URL filtering Layer, the parallel lookup fails.

I have more than three years of experience with Check Point NGFW.

Stability can be improved further.

Scalability is excellent.

Technical support is very good and provides the right solutions every time. They are highly skilled.

We have seen many customers migrating their firewall from Sophos to Check Point, or from Cisco to Check Point. The main reason has been that they were not getting NGFW functionality and the security feature sets that Check Point provides.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I implemented it with the help of a vendor.

We are definitely getting most of the things that we expect from this product.

Check Point is a vendor that listens to customers and determines what they want. Based on the requirements and the solutions offered by other vendors, Check Point will negotiate to try and give the customer the best price.

Check Point offers options and operates differently from other vendors with respect to licensing. Each blade requires that you have a license.

We also evaluated Palo alto.

I think people like me love Check Point because in my experience over the years, I have not heard of a comprise where Check Point was protecting the network. As long as the devices are configured properly, this is a very small chance of being compromised.

In general, the NGFW features in Check Point fulfill our requirements, which is expected from a Cybersecurity firm that has been involved in the field for a long time. 

Our company works in developing and delivering online gambling platforms. The Check Point NGFWs are the core security solution we use to protect our DataCenter environment located in Asia (Taiwan). The environment has about ~50 physical servers as virtualization hosts, and we have two HA Clusters consist of 2x5400 hardware appliances, managed by an OpenServer Security Management Server on a Virtual Machine (KVM), all running on R80.10 with the latest JumboHotfix. The Clusters serve as firewalls for both inter-VLAN and external traffic.

The overall security of the environment has been greatly improved by the Check Point NGFWs. Before implementing this solution we have to rely on the Cisco ACLs and Zone-Based firewall that we had configured on switches and routers, which in fact a simple stateful firewall, and currently not an efficient for protecting from advanced threats. The Check Point NGFWs brought up the security level with the help of the advanced software blades - we use Application Control, URL Filtering, IPS, Anti-Bot, and Antivirus. The setup was simple, and the performance is great - we have significant resources to expand the environment in the future without disabling any blades and thus maintaining the security on the same, high level.

1. Advanced logging capabilities - our support team on duty constantly monitors the security logs in the SmartConsole, and notifies the security team in case of major alerts.

2. Advanced networking and routing features - we use Proxy ARP to announced virtual IPs to ISP and bing domain names to it; BGP for dynamic routing over IPSec VPN tunnels to other environments, and Policy-Based Routing for connecting to two ISPs.

3. The new Policy Layers feature for building up the Access Control policy - the rules are now more understandable and efficient.

The pricing for the Check Point products should be reconsidered - we found it to be quite expensive to purchase and to maintain (the licenses and the support services need to be prolonged regularly). 

We also had several support cases opened for software issues (e.g. unstable BGP sessions over VPN tunnels), which, in our opinion, took too long to resolve - up to one month.

Also, even so, the new SmartConsole is declared to be unified starting from version R80.10, there are still some features that have to be configured in the old SmartDashboard (e.g. Mobile Access policy and Antivirus), or on the Gaia OS level (all the routing features).

We have been using the Check Point Next-Generation Firewalls for about 3 years, starting from late 2017.

In general, the solution is stable, but we still have had some support cases opened and have to install the JumboHotfixes on a regular basis to fix the minor bugs. Please note that the current version of the software we use - R80.10 - is not the latest one (R80.40).

The solution is scalable - we use the Active-Standby Clusters, but could switch to Active-Active and add additional Gateway nodes if needed.

We have had several support cases opened. Some of the were resolved by installing the latest recommended JumoHotfix, some required additional configuration on OS kernel level (e.g. TCP MSS clamping). The longest issue took about one month to be resolved, which we consider too long.

We relied on the ACLs and Zone-Based firewalls of the Cisco switches and firewalls, which doesn't provide sufficient security protection against the modern advanced threats. 

The equipment has been delivered on time, without delays. The setup was straightforward. The configuration was easy and understandable. 

In-house team - we have a Check Point Certified engineer.

Use the Check Point Performance Sizing Utility to measure and estimate the hardware needed to purchase for your environment.