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

Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

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 Cloud and Data Center Security
5th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Container Security (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (3rd)
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
1st
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (4th), Microsegmentation Software (2nd)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
9th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (9th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Cloud and Data Center Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is 25.1%, up from 19.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 0.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud and Data Center 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.
KlavsThaarup - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers micro segmentation capabilities and easy to setup
It's micro-segmentation The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature. There are always areas for improvement. It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud. So that could be improved. In future releases, I would like to see more integration with other…
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

"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"SentinelOne is far superior to our previous solution, Accops, due to its seamless updates, effortless maintenance, and user-friendly interface and dashboard."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"The most valuable feature of PingSafe is its integration with most of our technology stack, specifically all of our cloud platforms and ticketing software."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security has significantly improved our risk posture."
"The tool is a complete package that offers many features like visibility. You can get a graph with real-time workflows and visibility into server-to-server communication. We get visibility into many things happening within our environment."
"Guardicore makes its own rule set automatically, so we can work fast when creating a rule set."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"It saves time because I can look across the organization. Instead of checking 50 different accounts atomically and spending 15 minutes investigating each, I can spend 15 minutes exploring all 50 accounts. It allows me to quickly look across the org for similar problems when one comes up. That's a huge time saver."
"The most valuable features are the ability to create pipeline rules, the enhanced NetOps security, and the deep visibility across our entire infrastructure."
"The CloudGuard for Cloud Intelligence tool has several significant features that provide security to our company."
"The dashboard is intuitive. You know if you're compliant or not, and then it gives you a remediation plan."
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its compliance engine and auto-remediation features."
"People implementing this solution are concerned with addressing a significant risk, and within the AWS realm, this tool does de-risk substantially."
"The solution offers an excellent price, benefit, and installation relationship."
"We can monitor each activity from our mobile devices, so there is complete visibility of our cloud traffic flows, with threat intelligence provided by Check Point."
 

Cons

"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"I want PingSafe to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, PingSafe is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If PingSafe had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"I would like to see the map feature improve. It's good, but it isn't fully developed. It lets us use custom resources and policies but does not allow us to perform some actions. I would also like more custom integration and runtime security for Kubernetes."
"There can be a specific type of alert showing that a new type of risk has been identified."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"I would like to see tighter integration with other compliance tools, like Chef Compliance, in addition to Inspector."
"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 it provides is not very good. They should improve it since we have had several setbacks due to support issues."
"Automatic remediation requires read/write access. When providing read/write access to third-party applications, this can add risk. It should have some options of triggering API calls to the cloud platform, which in turn, can make the required changes."
"Sometimes, the solution provides us with false alerts of vulnerabilities that are not present in our cloud environment."
"There are opportunities for improvement that can be addressed through a roadmap."
"It should have some options to activate API calls to the platform in the cloud, another improvement would be that when the rules are colonized and they want to be published."
"The shift left part is not yet at a maturity level I desire. I need more integration from the code-to-cloud principle."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing was a little less than other providers."
"SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven."
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is costly."
"It is cheap."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's pricing is good."
"SentinelOne is quite costly compared to other security platforms."
"PingSafe is less expensive than other options."
"Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is expensive."
"The solution is reasonably priced and I would rate it a six out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"The price is the same as other products in the market. There's no price argument to choose one or the other product, it will cost the customer approximately the same."
"GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
"The customer would complain about the cost."
"Guardicore Centra provides better value for money than NSX, was the other solution that we looked at, which was too expensive for what it does."
"The pricing is too high."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"I would advise taking into account the existing number of devices and add a forecast of the number of devices to be added in the coming year or two, to obtain better pricing."
"It is difficult to contextualize the pricing because we are used to Indian pricing and licensing."
"Everything in this field is very expensive."
"The pricing is extremely competitive."
"CloudGuard is fairly priced."
"The licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads (number of instances) within one license with no additional nor hidden charges. If you want to have 200 workloads under Dome9, then you need to take out two licenses for that. Also, it does not have any impact on cloud billing, as data is shared using the API call. This is well within the limit of free API calls provided by the cloud provider."
"Licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads within one license and no additional charges."
"I suggest that you pay attention to the product pricing because while there are no tricks, and the licensing model is transparent, the final numbers may surprise you."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud and Data Center Security solutions are best for your needs.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
In version 2, a lot of rules have been deployed for Kubernetes security and CDR, which makes a lot of issues of criti...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Guardicore Centra?
I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. I know other micro-segmentation t...
What do you like most about Guardicore Infection Monkey?
Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy ...
What needs improvement with Guardicore Infection Monkey?
When we have more than one interface, we can only have one policy for both interfaces. Normally, you have assets with...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Guardicore Centra, GuardiCore
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Santander, Frontier Airlines, OpenLink, Intermountain Healthcare, Cellcom, BancoBASE
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.