We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and Checkmarx One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With the solution, we managed to obtain complete comprehensive visibility of the entire environment in the cloud, thus having better control of each of the resources."
"The solution offers continuous security monitoring and alerting, which can help organizations detect and respond to security incidents in real time."
"The tool performs device health checkups and updates us. It helps us to be compliant with regulatory policies."
"I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is AI, which makes operations easier. Moreover, it is easy to deploy."
"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."
"The app control is very sensitive, and the threat detection and prevention is better than other Check Point solutions. There is a centralized management console for threat protection and self-inspection."
"It helps us streamline our revenue streams, and we're spending less money on application security."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"Helps us check vulnerabilities in our SAP Fiori application."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security needs to improve updates on integrations. It also needs to incorporate real-time monitoring features."
"I have faced issues with the tool's blocking aspects. It is hard to open or block web services due to the multitude of cloud centers. I have to do the process manually at times. We have a bug which is hard to solve."
"I would like to be able to integrate the theme of Artificial Intelligence to help review issues and to monitor and view the security issue while also suggesting and interpreting and additionally configuring solutions - basically, acting as an interpreter."
"The coding configurations can be simplified to save time for IT teams and developers."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"Cost reduction and trial period extension should be considered with some lucrative discount offerings in buying standard versions."
"In terms of features, I do not have any negatives. Their integration is extremely quick. It is better than others I have been involved with in the past. Their pricing model, however, can be better."
"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
"Its user interface could be improved and made more friendly."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities. This includes expanded coverage for mobile applications as well as open-source development tools."
"Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient."
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 11th in Application Security Tools with 30 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 9.0, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with SonarQube, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Checkmarx One report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
