We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and WatchGuard Firebox based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The base firewall features are quite valuable to us."
"The most valuable feature is the VDOM, which allows the customer to have multiple firewalls in a single campus."
"Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"The email protection and VPN features are the most valuable."
"We use the filtering feature the most. It has filtering and inbuilt securities. We can create customized rules to define which users can access a particular type of site. We can create policies inside the firewall."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"The solution's most valuable feature is scalability. We can increase the number of CPUs, memory, and firewall throughput easily. Using CloudGuard Network Security for managing cloud firewall rules is considered easier than using the normal security groups provided by Azure or AWS."
"When browsing, it scans sites to ensure that they are safe and that no harm can be caused."
"It really is a pretty complete solution."
"Workflows across the company ecosystem have can flow smoothly without experiencing any challenges."
"I like the firewall and the virtual machine. I also like that it's compatible with Amazon Web Services and Azure."
"The most valuable feature for us is the simplicity of creating this environment. Even though our current cloud usage is limited, the process of setting up machines in the product and establishing an HR system was straightforward."
"The visibility, the one-pane-of-glass which allows me to see all of my edge protection through one window and one log, is great. Monitoring everything through that one pane of glass is extremely valuable."
"Its blades and VSLS (Virtual System Load Sharing) work fine."
"It protects me against malicious websites, as well as malicious downloads, as a perimeter anti-virus. I've also seen it blocking a lot of pings and different probes."
"The most valuable features are the VPN and web blocker security."
"The ease of use is most valuable. You can quickly train someone who hasn't seen a firewall in life. You can get people up to speed, and in a few months, they are able to manage this product very easily. It is a very user-friendly, scalable, and stable product. Its price is also spot-on."
"Easy to change the model if you need more performance, with good cohesion in the whole lineup of devices."
"It's hard to pick one feature over another. But if I had to pick one, the UTM would be the most valuable because of the notification. I get notified via email if there is any type of threat detection or alert, telling me something is wrong."
"Two of the functionalities we use most are the traffic monitoring and the full panel dashboard. Those are two things that are very useful for us... In addition, it provides us with layered security. It allows us to determine what types of access, to which networks, we want to allow or deny."
"WebBlocker has the best URL category database ever."
"The main features of the solution are the control of the site-to-site network access and the overall features."
"The solution could have licensing fees reduced in the future."
"The search tool needs improvement. It's very difficult to search for policies right now."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"It's my understanding that more of the current generation features could be brought in. There could be more integration with EDRs, for example."
"For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"I would like to see better pricing in the next release, as well as a simplification of the installation."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"The documentation could be much better."
"In future releases, I would like to see the data loss prevention (DLP) feature could scale along with the virtual machine scale sets."
"Lacks the ability to integrate with other security solutions."
"The business and product development team should introduce a high-end feedback collection mechanism and analyze the customer requirements constructively."
"The initial setup is complex and could be made simpler."
"The product needs to improve support. They don't consider my case the number one priority even though I want a quick resolution."
"We have the product deployed on Azure China. One crucial concern is the version limitation; unfortunately, in Azure China, we are restricted to running version R80. Our architecture has a Load Balancer, VMSS CloudGuard, etc. The duplication in this setup prevents the application from seeing the original client IP. This poses a problem for certain applications that require the original IP for login purposes. Although we managed a workaround with a different architecture involving a WAF, it is not as straightforward as the standard Azure setup."
"New features have been introduced recently, but they have not yet been integrated into CloudGuard Vsec."
"The way Secure Sign-On authentication is happening needs to be improved. When the Secure Sign-On portal is turned on, anybody who comes into the campus, whether he or she is a staff member or a guest, has to go past the initial portal. One of the shortcomings is the username. It shouldn't allow permutations or combinations with upper or lower cases. For example, when there is a username abc, it shouldn't allow ABC or Abc. It should not allow the same username, but currently, two separate people can go in. Therefore, its authentication or validation should be improved, and the case sensitiveness should be picked up. If I have restricted someone to two devices, they shouldn't be able to use different combinations of the same username and get into the third or fourth device. It shouldn't allow different combinations of alphabets to be used to log in."
"Setup of this solution is complex, it's not plug and play."
"There is a slight learning curve."
"Sometimes, the writing rules are a little confusing in how am I doing them."
"The next release should have better software and configuration systems that can also be used on Linux."
"There is room for improvement in the threat protection, data packet inspection, and performance of the solution. Generally, it's just a lower-end product. It does the job but doesn't do it very well."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"The reporting is a little on the weak side. I would like to see a better reporting set and easier drill-down options."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 121 reviews while WatchGuard Firebox is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 79 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while WatchGuard Firebox is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "Highly reliable, great visibility, and centralized management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Firebox writes "Offers a streamlined deployment, intuitive interface and robust security features". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas WatchGuard Firebox is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, SonicWall TZ and Meraki MX. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. WatchGuard Firebox report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors, best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors, and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.
