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

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), 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
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (8th), Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (5th)
Threat Stack Cloud Security...
Ranking in Container Security
36th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
30th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
34th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (24th)
 

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.
SC
SecOps program for us, as a smaller company, is amazing; they know what to look for
They could give a few more insights into security groups and recommendations on how to be more effective. That's getting more into the AWS environment, specifically. I'm not sure if that's Threat Stack's plan or not, but I would like them to help us be efficient about how we're setting up security groups. They could recommend separation of VPCs and the like - really dig into our architecture. I haven't seen a whole lot of that and I think that's something that, right off the bat, could have made us smarter. Even as part of the SecOps Program, that could be helpful; a quick analysis. They're analyzing our whole infrastructure and saying, "You have one VPC and that doesn't make a lot of sense, that should be multiple VPCs and here's why." The architecture of the servers in whatever cloud-hosting provider you're on could be helpful. Other than that, they should continue to expand on their notifications and on what's a vulnerability. They do a great job of that and we want them to continue to do that. It would be cool, since the agent is already deployed and they know about the server, they know the IP address, and they know what vulnerability is there, for them to test the vulnerability and see if they can actually exploit it. Or, once we patch it, they could double-check that it can't be. I don't know how hard that would be to build. Thinking on it off the top off my head, it could be a little challenging but it could also be highly interesting. It would also be great if we could test a couple of other features like hammering a server with 100 login attempts and see what happens. Real test scenarios could be really helpful. That is probably more something close to what they do with the SOC 2 audit or the report. But more visualization of that, being able to test things out on our infrastructure to make sure we can or can't hit this box could be interesting.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"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."
"I like CSPM the most. It captures a lot of alerts within a short period of time. When an alert gets triggered on the cloud, it throws an alert within half an hour, which is very reasonable. It is a plus point for us."
"Singularity Cloud's ability to create custom correlation searches and reduce noise is highly valuable."
"We like the platform and its response time. We also like that its console is user-friendly as well as modern and sleek."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"The most valuable feature is the single dashboard that enables us to manage the entire cloud environment from one place."
"The rulesets and the findings are valuable. The actual core functionality of it and the efficacy of events are great."
"The way they offer container security is a big highlight that I have noticed. The solution is also agentless, so the scanning, runtime, really everything is offered directly by CloudGuard."
"The various CNAPP modules have granted more visibility of our cloud applications to our system engineers and developers."
"People implementing this solution are concerned with addressing a significant risk, and within the AWS realm, this tool does de-risk substantially."
"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."
"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."
"This solution has saved the company from unnecessary data loss that occurs due to cyber attacks."
"The most valuable feature is the SecOps because they have our back and they help us with the reports... It's like having an extension of your team. And then, it grows with you."
"We're using it on container to see when activity involving executables happens, and that's great."
"An important feature of this solution is monitoring. Specifically, container monitoring."
"It has been quite helpful to have the daily alerts coming to my email, as well as the Sev 1 Alerts... We just went through a SOX audit and those were pivotal."
"There has been a measurable decrease in the meantime to remediation... because we have so many different tech verticals already collated in one place, our ability to respond is drastically different than it used to be."
"Technical support is very helpful."
"Every other security tool we've looked is good at containers, or at Kubernetes, is good at AWS, or at instance monitoring. But nobody is good at tying all of those things together, and that's really where Threat Stack shines."
"We like the ability of the host security module to monitor the processes running on our servers to help us monitor activity."
 

Cons

"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"The area of improvement is the cost, which is high compared to other traditional endpoint protections."
"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."
"I export CSV. I cannot export graphs. Restricting it to the CSV format has its own disadvantages. These are all machine IP addresses and information. I cannot change it to the JSON format. The export functionality can be improved."
"PingSafe is an excellent CSPM tool, but the CWPP features need to improve, and there is a scope for more application security posture management features. There aren't many ASPM solutions on the market, and existing ones are costly. I would like to see PingSafe develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM, CSPM, and CWPP. Another feature I'd like to see is runtime protection."
"One potential drawback is the cost of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, which may be prohibitive for smaller businesses or startups, particularly those in regions with lower average incomes, such as India."
"I request that SentinelOne investigate this false positive, as SentinelOne has a higher false positive rate than other XDR solutions."
"It took us a while to configure the software to work well in this type of environment, as the support documents were not always clear."
"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 false positives can be annoying at times."
"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."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"I'd like to see more advanced encryption for local features, which is not present right now."
"They take time to respond or coordinate a meeting since they maintain a schedule that does not fit Latin America very well."
"The integration process could be enhanced by enabling integration at the organizational level rather than requiring the manual setup of individual accounts."
"The setup can be better. With every other Check Point product, the setup is scripted. You just approve versions, and then you are off. The setup for this solution is still very much manual. I would like to see that transition to more of a scripted setup."
"The one thing that we know they're working on, but we don't have through the tool, is the application layer. As we move to a serverless environment, with AWS Fargate or direct Lambda, that's where Threat Stack does not have the capacity to provide feed. Those are areas that it's blind to now..."
"Some features do not work as expected."
"The solution’s ability to consume alerts and data in third-party tools (via APIs and export into S3 buckets) is moderate. They have some work to do in that area... The API does not mimic the features of the UI as far as reporting and pulling data out go. There's a big discrepancy there."
"I would like further support of Windows endpoint agents or the introduction of support for Windows endpoint agents."
"The API - which has grown quite a bit, so we're still learning it and I can't say whether it still needs improvement - was an area that had been needing it."
"The reports aren't very good. We've automated the report generation via the API and replaced almost all the reports that they generate for us using API calls instead."
"They could give a few more insights into security groups and recommendations on how to be more effective. That's getting more into the AWS environment, specifically. I'm not sure if that's Threat Stack's plan or not, but I would like them to help us be efficient about how we're setting up security groups. They could recommend separation of VPCs and the like - really dig into our architecture. I haven't seen a whole lot of that and I think that's something that, right off the bat, could have made us smarter."
"The user interface can be a little bit clunky at times... There's a lot of information that needs to be waded through, and the UI just isn't great."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe is affordable."
"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"
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."
"Its pricing is okay. It is in line with what other providers were providing. It is not cheap. It is not expensive."
"I would rate the cost a seven out of ten with ten being the most costly."
"The price depends on the extension of the solution that you want to buy. If you want to buy just EDR, the price is less. XDR is a little bit more expensive. There are going to be different add-ons for Singularity."
"It is cheap."
"The tool's pricing is moderate. Its licensing costs are yearly."
"Right now, we have licenses on 500 machines, and they are not cheap."
"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."
"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."
"​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. ​"
"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 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."
"Licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads within one license and no additional charges."
"I'm happy with the amount that we spend for the product that we get and the overall service that we get. It's not cheap, but I'm still happy with the spend."
"Pricing seems to be in line with the market structure. It's fine."
"It is a cost-effective choice versus other solutions on the market."
"What we're paying now is somewhere around $15 to $20 per agent per month, if I recall correctly. The other cost we have is SecOps."
"We find the licensing and pricing very easy to understand and a good value for the services provided."
"It is very expensive compared to some other products. The pricing is definitely high."
"It came in cheaper than Trend Micro when we purchased it a few years ago."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 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%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Security Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Real Estate/Law Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

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?
The pricing is somewhat high compared to other market tools. This cost can be particularly prohibitive for small busi...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
To enhance the notification system's efficiency, resolved issues should be promptly removed from the portal. Currentl...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
Threat Stack, CSP,
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
StatusPage.io, Walkbase, Spanning, DNAnexus, Jobcase, Nextcapital, Smartling, Veracode, 6sense
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.