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

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs Lacework FortiCNAPP comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 12, 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 Vulnerability Management
6th
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
4th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Ranking in Compliance Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (5th)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
8th
Ranking in Container Security
6th
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
Ranking in Compliance Management
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th)
Lacework FortiCNAPP
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
16th
Ranking in Container Security
15th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
13th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
15th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
11th
Ranking in Compliance Management
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 1.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Lacework FortiCNAPP is 1.5%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

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.
Yokesh Mani - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to write custom rules and policies in the UI with limited coding knowledge
The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product. For example, let's say it's showing a process violation. It should be able to do some additional malware scanning in that particular bucket to get some additional information. I don't want to integrate with another third-party tool or go to the native server to check something. It would be helpful to have integrated monitoring and malware scanning for the file types. There are a few flaws with the security management portal where I have limited visibility into the workload protection features. There is no error visibility where I can see the communication and workflow between services. Some of the dashboards need to be fine-tuned if they are not customized. For example, I cannot customize anything on the effective risk management dashboard. Some of the information is not correct for my tenant. With respect to passwords and user management, there are no policies I can measure at the user level. If the user was created more than six months ago, you don't need to worry about that password or do anything like two-factor authentication associated with that user. They can still log in after six months or one year. It's also a challenge to use CloudGuard's agentless workload posture with AWS. An Azure storage is summed up with a CNAPP encryption by default. We tried onboarding this data, but the problem is the attachment is not done. After a few days, we identified that it was impossible to do the encryption detection. But CloudGuard's default rules say that this has to be encrypted. The AWS module says that we cannot access this volume with this encryption, so we cannot use an agentless workload posture with AWS because of this. It is a best practice to ensure that all the volumes are being encrypted. Without the encryption, how can I do this? It is a big challenge for CloudGuard.
Carlos Vitrano - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides quick visibility and significantly reduces alerts
Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them. We have integrations, for instance, with Splunk. The data that we are receiving in Splunk is huge, and it is valid because Lacework has a bunch of data that they can provide to you. However, to be able to import the data and create alerts, we needed to do some work, so integration is one of the things that they can improve. For container security, how they scan images and how they provide results is something that they need to continue improving in terms of visibility. We already have visibility to several artifacts, but they can take that to the next level and see what else they can do. There can be better integrations with CI/CD pipelines. There can be improvements in terms of how we can take action or how we can report from the number of inventories they are providing to us.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The visibility PingSafe provides into the Cloud environment is a valuable feature."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"You not only get to know about vulnerabilities and misconfigurations but also some of the actual"
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its storyline, which helps trace an event back to its source, like an email or someone clicking on a link."
"Cloud Native Security is user-friendly. Everything in the Cloud Native Security tool is straightforward, including detections, integration, reporting, etc. They are constantly improving their UI by adding plugins and other features."
"Cloud Native Security's evidence-based reporting allows us to prioritize issues by understanding their impact, helping us resolve the most important problems first."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"PingSafe provides email alerts and ranks issues based on severity, such as high, critical, etc., that help us prioritize issues."
"We know the vulnerability in advance, so we can take some action for that vulnerability."
"The solution's main benefit is that it automates all the patching and reporting parts and generates an automated report."
"The most valuable feature is posture management, which gives you complete visibility of all your assets in the cloud and allows you to do governance and compliance."
"It presents a real-time database that is always updated."
"The reporting against compliance is an important feature that helps you comply with policies and standards within your organization."
"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 posture management and remediation features are the most valuable. We use GSL Builder to build custom rules in alignment with our organization's policies. CloudGuard has canned rules using multiple standard frameworks, but we also have additional rules."
"The most valuable feature is the separate environment."
"I find the cloud configuration compliance scanning mature. It generates a lot of data and supports major frameworks like ISO 27001 or SOC 2, providing reports and datasets. Another feature I appreciate is setting custom alerts for specific events. Additionally, I value the agent-based monitoring and scanning for compute nodes. It gives us deeper insights into our workloads and helps identify vulnerabilities across our deployed assets."
"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."
"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."
"Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offers, along with the ability to identify and address misconfigurations, is invaluable. When such issues arise, we promptly acknowledge and take action, effectively collaborating with our teams and the responsible parties for those assets. This enables us to promptly manage problems as soon as they arise."
"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"The most valuable feature, from a compliance perspective, is the ability to use Lacework as a platform for multiple compliance standards. We have to meet multiple standards like PCI, SOC 2, CIS, and whatever else is out there. The ability to have reports generated, per security standard, is one of the best features for me."
"The compliance reports are definitely most valuable because they save time and are accurate. So, instead of relying on a human going through and checking or providing me with a report, I could just log into Lacework and see for myself."
 

Cons

"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"We had a glitch in PingSafe where it fed us false positives in the past."
"Their search feature could be better."
"A few YouTube videos could be helpful. There isn't a lot of information out there to look at."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"A two-month grace period for extended searches would be a valuable improvement."
"While the future roadmap presented by SentinelOne appears promising, I hope the envisioned advancements are realistically achievable and that the gap between current offerings and long-term goals is not too significant."
"We have concerns regarding the pricing and would appreciate seeing some improvements."
"Currently, this solution is somewhat expensive."
"They take time to respond or coordinate a meeting since they maintain a schedule that does not fit Latin America very well."
"I would like to see some AI on the back-end, just to assist with doing analysis and making recommendations."
"No improvements are needed."
"The platform would be significantly enhanced by incorporating data security management capabilities."
"I strongly advise that the multi-layered security system of Check Point often undergoes updates and new versions keep coming."
"Automation and advanced threat prevention have room for improvement."
"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."
"Lacework has not reduced the number of alerts we get. We've actually had to add resources as a result of using it because the application requires a lot of people to understand it to get the value out of it properly."
"Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them."
"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."
"There are a couple of the difficulties we encounter in the realm of cybersecurity, or security as a whole, that relate to potentially limited clarity. Having the capacity to perceive the configuration aspect and having the ability to contribute to it holds substantial advantages, in my view. It ranks high, primarily due to its role in guaranteeing compliance and the potential to uncover vulnerabilities, which could infiltrate the system and introduce potential risks. I had been exploring a specific feature that captured my interest. However, just yesterday, I participated in a product update session that announced the imminent arrival of this feature. The feature involves real-time alerting. This was something I had been anticipating, and it seems that this capability is now being integrated, possibly as part of threat intelligence. While anomaly events consistently and promptly appear in the console, certain alerts tend to experience delays before being displayed. Yet, with the recent product update, this issue is expected to be resolved. Currently, a comprehensive view of all policies is available within the console. However, I want a more tailored display of my compliance posture, focusing specifically on policies relevant to me. For instance, if I'm not subject to HIPAA regulations, I'd prefer not to see the HIPAA compliance details. It's worth noting that even with this request, there exists a filtering mechanism to control the type of compliance information visible. This flexibility provides a workaround to my preference, which is why it's challenging for me to definitively state my exact request."
"A feature that I have requested from them is the ability to sort alerts and policies based on a security framework. Right now, when you go into alerts, you have hundreds and hundreds of them that you have to manually pick. It would be useful to have categories for CIS Benchmark or SOC 2 and be able to display all the alerts and policies for one security framework."
"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe's pricing is good because it provides us with a solution."
"Pricing is based on modules, which was ideal for us."
"I wasn't sure what to expect from the pricing, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was a little less than I thought."
"It is a little expensive. I would rate it a four out of ten for pricing."
"PingSafe falls within the typical price range for cloud security platforms."
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"The pricing is tremendous and super cheap. It is shockingly cheap for what you get out of it. I am happy with that. I hope that doesn't get reported back and they increase the prices. I love the pricing and the licensing makes sense. It is just assets: The more stuff that you have, the more you pay."
"Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is always known as a good solution but an expensive one. When you're using Cisco, Check Point, or Palo Alto, you know that you will pay more, but you know that it will work."
"The tool's pricing is moderate. Its licensing costs are yearly."
"The solution’s pricing is a little bit high."
"The license for CloudGuard Posture Management is about $80 a year, and it's based on your cloud footprint, not the number of users. So you could have a million users, and it doesn't matter."
"The pricing is extremely competitive."
"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."
"Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is expensive."
"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."
"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
University
5%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Retailer
5%
 

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?
SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashb...
What do you like most about Lacework?
Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offe...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?
My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
Polygraph, FortiCNP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Lacework FortiCNAPP and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.