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

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 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 Container Security
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (3rd)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Container Security
6th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (8th), Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (6th)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
22nd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
18th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 2.0%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 2.8%, down from 3.1% 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.
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.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is scalable, stable, and can detect any threat on a machine. It uses artificial intelligence and can lock down any virus."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"PingSafe stands out for its user-friendly interface and intuitive software, making it easy to navigate and use."
"PingSafe offers security solutions for both Kubernetes and CI/CD pipelines."
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"The key strength of Singularity Cloud Security lies in its ability to pinpoint vulnerabilities in our cloud accounts and identify suspicious activity that warrants further investigation."
"With PingSafe, it's easy to onboard new accounts."
"Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP's initial configuration is very easy. It is plug-and-play. It also gives regular updates."
"We know the vulnerability in advance, so we can take some action for that vulnerability."
"CloudGuard's best feature is real-time detection. We can detect incidents and vulnerabilities in our code with one click."
"The solution offers an excellent price, benefit, and installation relationship."
"The valuable features of Checkpoint CloudGuard CNAPP include its automation capabilities."
"The Compliance engine has helped put our auditors and senior executives at ease, as we can quickly and accurately measure ourselves against hundreds of compliance checks to include CIS benchmarks, PCI, and other best practices."
"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."
"People implementing this solution are concerned with addressing a significant risk, and within the AWS realm, this tool does de-risk substantially."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
 

Cons

"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."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"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."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashboard can also be laggy."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"CloudGuard CNAPP could be enhanced by increasing the number of components that run natively on Azure."
"The reporting dashboard responds slowly, which leads to late report compilation."
"Currently, this solution is somewhat expensive."
"The biggest thing is the documentation aspect of Dome9 is a little lacking. They were purchased by Check Point about a year and a half to two years ago. When they integrated into Check Point's support system, a lot of the documentation that they had previously got mangled in the transition, e.g., linking to stuff on the Dome9 website that no longer exists. There are still a lot of spaces with incomplete links and stuff that is not as fully explained as it could be."
"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."
"Their service needs improvement."
"I’d like to see more integration with third-party tools. For example, it would be helpful to have an integration between Dome9 and ServiceNow to manage security incidents and security changes."
"The false positives can be annoying at times."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is easy to understand and implement, with some flexibility to accommodate dynamic environments."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"The pricing is fair. It is not inexpensive, and it is also not expensive. When managing a large organization, it is going to be costly, but it meets the business needs. In terms of what is out there on the market, it is fair and comparable to what I have seen, so I do not have any complaints about the cost"
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"PingSafe is less expensive than other options."
"It was reasonable pricing for me."
"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"CloudGuard is fairly priced."
"The price is on the higher end."
"The solution’s pricing is a little bit high."
"Its price is very fair."
"In the beginning, the price of Dome9 was cheap, whereas now it is not."
"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."
"It is difficult to contextualize the pricing because we are used to Indian pricing and licensing."
"​They support either annual licensing or hourly. At the time of our last negotiation, it was either one or the other, you could not mix or match. I would have liked to mix/match. ​"
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 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%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
5%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
 

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?
From my personal experience, the alerting system needs to be faster. If something happens in our infrastructure, the ...
What do you like most about NeuVector?
The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NeuVector?
SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution. You have to pay for the support.
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node por...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
NeuVector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.