Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AccuKnox Platform vs Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
2nd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
3rd
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
105
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Compliance Management (3rd)
AccuKnox Platform
Ranking in Container Security
31st
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
25th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
32nd
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
23rd
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (9th)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Container Security
7th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
6th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
5th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (9th), Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AccuKnox Platform is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 2.0%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
RaviUpadhyay - PeerSpot reviewer
Uses unique technologies for container security, flexible integration but lacks good user experience
There should always be some customized reports included. The dashboard is one thing, and the second is a report. Based on that, users can assist their environment. For example, for some Terraform code, customers want end-to-end things with their tool. They don’t want multiple tools. For a specific purpose, we need to look at different tools. They will look for a solution in one platform only so that the cost can be saved. If we use multiple tools, it means we need to give access to different ports in their environment. It is basically a kind of security compromise happening. Users have a lot of ports being used. So, basically, users don’t want to use multiple tools. They want a single tool that includes multiple features. The report part was missing. Also, some kind of clarity [flow clarity] is not in the tool as of now, but they are working on it. For example, if somebody manages the tool in their environment, the tool should be user-friendly. But this tool is not user-friendly as of now. This tool needs some kind of improvement so that new users or new security engineers can understand all the things in a short period of time. They can understand what is happening and how we can provide. They are catching the customer needs and working along with their development team. For example, some of the policies customers wanted to be placed at the organization level were missing. But AccuKnox have projections as well. Some of the good things they have used are flexible to integrate with other tools. For example, not from the security point of view, but maybe CI/CD, some third-party tools helping out to optimize the container image in terms of being lightweight or having a very low surface level. Basically, it protects against surface attacks. If a heavier image is used, it takes time to upload and impacts overall application performance. So, some tools are good for optimization.
Bart Coddens - PeerSpot reviewer
Evolved cloud security with active monitoring but needs interface consistency
The user interface needs work. Sometimes, it is a transition from the old tool to the new CNAPP Two that I currently have, and remnants of the old environment can still be detected. I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel. More work is needed in fine-tuning the threat data towards your CSPM and activity logs, aligning them with business intelligence, which requires a cohesive console interface. My assessment of CloudGuard CDRs in intrusion detection and threat hunting capabilities is that it still needs some work. All the threat data that comes in, you need to fine tune it a bit.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"The most valuable aspect of Singularity Cloud Security is its unified dashboard."
"The Offensive Security Engine, powered by impressive AI/ML capabilities, seamlessly integrates with cloud infrastructure to analyze data and provide optimal security solutions."
"SentinelOne is far superior to our previous solution, Accops, due to its seamless updates, effortless maintenance, and user-friendly interface and dashboard."
"As a frequently audited company, we value PingSafe's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."
"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are cloud misconfiguration, Kubernetes, and IaC scanning."
"The platform is strong in container and kernel-level security."
"The solution's main benefit is that it automates all the patching and reporting parts and generates an automated report."
"It learns from behavior, attacks, management, detections, captures packets, real-time analysis, et cetera. It's generating knowledge from a variety of sources for an excellent analysis."
"It provides critical insights that enable the IT team to plan and launch smart investigations when there are security breaches."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"The product allows us to enhance the security of the implementations we have."
"The rulesets and the findings are valuable. The actual core functionality of it and the efficacy of events are great."
"We like the ability to investigate, analyze, and generate reports."
"The automatic learning and an AI engine help to find more modern vulnerability problems."
 

Cons

"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"There can be a specific type of alert showing that a new type of risk has been identified."
"For vulnerabilities, they are showing CVE ID. The naming convention should be better so that it indicates the container where a vulnerability is present. Currently, they are only showing CVE ID, but the same CVE ID might be present in multiple containers. We would like to have the container name so that we can easily fix the issue."
"While PingSafe offers real-time response, there is room for improvement in alert accuracy."
"Their search feature could be better."
"The reporting works well, but sometimes the severity classifications are inaccurate. Sometimes, it flags an issue as high-impact, but it should be a lower severity."
"PingSafe takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"AccuKnox platform have AI-based features, but those aren’t fully developed yet."
"The solution could be improved with a greater analysis of its Microsoft Security score."
"The accuracy of its remediation is a 7.5 out of 10. Before, I would have given it a ten but now, to handle remediation for fully qualified domain names, it's not working as it did in the past. We're finding some difficulties there."
"Check Point must provide a multi-cloud facility where AWS, Azure, and GCP can seamlessly work together and display posture in an integrated manner."
"I would like CloudGuard's pricing to be cheaper, but I think that's impossible. The pricing is the only thing I think they can improve."
"The support must be more effective."
"The security of Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management could improve. There are always new security issues coming out."
"Compliance checks on cloud resources against various industry standards and compliance framework templates need to be improved."
"Making basic rules is easy, but it's complex if you want to do something a little more nuanced. I've been unable to make some rules that I wanted. I couldn't evaluate some values or parameters of the components I look for. I haven't always been able to assess them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe is priced reasonably for our workload."
"It is a little expensive. I would rate it a four out of ten for pricing."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"I am personally not taking care of the pricing part, but when we moved from CrowdStrike to PingSafe, there were some savings. The price of CrowdStrike was quite high. Compared to that, the price of PingSafe was low. PingSafe is charging based on the subscription model. If I want to add an AWS subscription, I need to pay more. It should not be based on subscription. It should be based on the number of servers that I am scanning."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"Pricing is based on modules, which was ideal for us."
"SentinelOne offers excellent pricing and licensing options."
"Its pricing is constant. It has been constant over the previous year, so I am happy with it. However, price distribution can be better explained. That is the only area I am worried about. Otherwise, the pricing is very reasonable."
Information not available
"The price is on the higher end."
"Its price is very fair."
"Right now, we have licenses on 500 machines, and they are not cheap."
"Everything in this field is very expensive."
"From a pricing perspective, they are pretty expensive."
"The licensing part still needs some work. The issue that I have is that we do not use all the services in the cloud, but sometimes, CloudGuard identifies them as an asset."
"CloudGuard is fairly priced."
"The solution’s pricing is a little bit high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
841,431 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
University
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
From my personal experience, the alerting system needs to be faster. If something happens in our infrastructure, the ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AccuKnox Platform?
AccuKnox has fixed charges on that. Also, AccuKnox has cluster-based pricing, depending on how many cloud providers y...
What needs improvement with AccuKnox Platform?
There should always be some customized reports included. The dashboard is one thing, and the second is a report. Base...
What is your primary use case for AccuKnox Platform?
This product is for container-based security. It is a new tool; recently, they have been working independently with s...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
No data available
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, SentinelOne, Veracode and others in Container Security. Updated: March 2025.
841,431 professionals have used our research since 2012.