We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Wiz, SentinelOne and others in Vulnerability Management."Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP's initial configuration is very easy. It is plug-and-play. It also gives regular updates."
"The ability to drill down to individual hosts on an account and see which ones are affected is valuable."
"The feature that I find most valuable is the blocking feature."
"The product allows us to enhance the security of the implementations we have."
"It is able to bring visibility into that cloudy space where the security departments do not really see what is happening on the DevOps side. It brings visibility, security control, and standardization."
"The audit feature is the most valuable for compliance reasons. It gives you a full view of the whole environment, no matter how many accounts you have in AWS or Azure. You have it all under one umbrella."
"Cloud security posture management is the feature we've been using the longest."
"We have more visibility than ever before, appreciating the valuable and proactive insight that we receive from the platform."
"The setup is relatively straightforward."
"Prisma integrates well with Cortex XDR and Cortex Data Lake. My company has been also using Prisma Access in-house for nearly a year, and it integrates seamlessly."
"It's great that we can make sure a machine meets the minimum requirements before users are allowed to log in."
"We have an application called ADEM that helps us troubleshoot network-related issues. It helps us to isolate an issue whether it is on the ISP level, endpoint level, or system access level."
"It's very stable. Sometimes after installing the boxes, we leave them for one or two years. We would just touch the box in the case of the customer needing new requirements or changes to the setup."
"It is easy to use, easy to integrate, and is stable. It's scalable as well."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to join your network and provide access through the VPN."
"Overall, the cost savings, ease of deployment, and better VPN user experience and performance are valuable."
"The costs are high."
"The impact analysis that they perform can be improved. It is currently lacking. It should be more detailed."
"It does not support on-premise deployments such as VMware Tanzu, and this has been a major drawback when it comes to integrations with some applications."
"It should capture more information in metadata including communication detail. Also, Internal IP addresses should not be tracked as this might be having some compliance issues."
"The solution could be improved with a greater analysis of its Microsoft Security score."
"The product must provide different features like antivirus."
"CloudGuard could be improved by including integration with vendors other than AWS, especially Azure, especially in permissions."
"Especially with cloud security, there's too much clutter on the screen and too many things going on."
"It's not very easy to use. Sometimes it's buggy and there are problems when doing updates. The user interface is okay, but some configuration items are difficult. I would like it to be less buggy and easier to configure, to better streamline the user experience."
"Sometimes, you have these notifications sent out about changes in App-IDs, modifications in App-IDs, or even the introduction of entirely new App-IDs to replace. Sometimes, the recommendations are followed, but even then, when the package is installed on the firewall, it gets messed up. I remember a particular one was with Tableau, and suddenly, people weren't able to use Tableau, which is an analytics tool for business."
"We are using the SaaS offering. We use our applications for microservices. We use Twistlock to scan containers, and it displays these results in Prisma, which is a good feature because we can see vulnerabilities with respect to these containers. We can see everything in a very detailed manner. However, when you have different environments for a single application, such as DEV, QA, PROD, and TEST, all these environments run multiple containers, which can lead to a very high number of containers. In such a scenario, it shows you the alerts for all those containers that have vulnerabilities. If you show the results of all the containers that share the same image, it is not going to add any value. Therefore, they should narrow down the alerts based on a container. It should show information for a single container. Otherwise, the person who is looking at the results gets the impression that he has to fix all these issues. This is something that they can improve."
"It's not really Prisma's fault, but when you try to create exceptions you don't really have those abilities. You cannot say, on the management platform, "Hey, for these users I want to create these exceptions." That is one thing that I have gotten some complaints about, and we have faced some challenges there."
"The one thing that I've been a little bit disappointed with is when we have had to open cases with Palo Alto about Prisma Access issues. Versus their other platforms, like their firewalls, where we tend to get really quick responses and very definitive answers, the few tickets I've had to open for Prisma Access have taken them longer to respond to. And they haven't necessarily given me the kind of answer I was looking for, meaning a fix to the problem."
"My clients would like to see a more feature-rich product."
"From any improvement perspective, the product's compatibility issues with Linux need to be resolved."
"It would be nice to manage Prisma Access through the cloud instead of through Panorama. You can use the cloud version to monitor Prisma Access, but it doesn't have all the features yet, and it's not 100% done."
More Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 6th in Vulnerability Management with 64 reviews while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 59 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks writes "Integration with Palo Alto platforms such as Cortex Data Lake and Autofocus gives us visibility into our attack surface". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Tenable Cloud Security, whereas Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Netskope , Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Prisma SD-WAN.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
