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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs F5 Advanced WAF comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
14th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (9th)
F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

SP
Jul 12, 2024
If a zero-day attack originates in Europe, Check Point CloudGuard can detect it within minutes and distribute a new signature globally
When we activate the WAF, our security signatures and all the latest threat intelligence are immediately updated. Our protection is automatically refreshed every few hours to address emerging threats. For example, if a zero-day attack originates in Europe, Check Point CloudGuard can detect it within minutes and distribute a new signature globally. This ensures that when the attack reaches Australia, it is already blocked by our up-to-date WAF. Although the WAF still produces false positives because of the signatures, we can apply a rule to exclude them easily. Automated threat intelligence is crucial because a ransomware attack can compromise a network in minutes. Imagine an attack occurring at 3 AM when staff is unavailable; the damage may already be done when someone investigates. Ransomware can infiltrate and complete its task within just a few sessions. Once inside, attackers can lay dormant for months, covertly sending data using internal IP addresses. These addresses are often whitelisted, making it difficult to detect whether the outbound traffic is authorized or malicious. Automated threat intelligence can rapidly detect and respond to attacks, unlike manual processes that take 15 to 20 minutes, often too late to prevent significant damage like a completed ransomware attack. Systems like OCSP, utilizing best practices from multiple vendors such as Azure, Microsoft, CheckPoint, Palo Alto, and CloudStrike, provide an open platform for sharing and updating threat signatures. This enables organizations to tailor their security measures based on specific application needs and behaviors, effectively mitigating risks without unnecessary restrictions. Cloud-based WAF solutions, such as Check Point's, offer significant advantages compared to traditional on-premises WAFs like Cisco or Palo Alto. On-premises WAFs require substantial upfront costs for hardware, expensive licenses, and frequent, costly upgrades as technology evolves. Cloud-based alternatives eliminate these expenses by providing the latest features and capabilities without hardware or software management. This flexibility and cost-efficiency make cloud WAFs appealing to many organizations. However, cloud solutions can be more expensive for high-throughput applications like Instagram or Facebook due to data transfer costs. At the same time, on-premises options might be more economical in these cases. Ultimately, the best choice depends on specific network size, criticality, and application requirements.
Phani Sundar Mandarapu - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 3, 2024
Efficiently protect web servers exposed to the external network and robust stability
Primarily, the Advanced WAF sits behind our network perimeter. It centralizes traffic flow to our network, filters requests, and identifies any potential threats It helps us detect threats or malicious requests coming into the network, protecting it from being hacked. It helps guard against…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 tool's most valuable feature is AI, which makes operations easier. Moreover, it is easy to deploy."
"They offer free trials, which is quite appreciative and grabs more attention from new users and businesses."
"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."
"The most valuable feature we have found in Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its rich logging capabilities."
"I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable."
"On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
"User attitude reviews help us keep all online users compliant with company regulations and policies."
"F5 Advanced WAF is a stable solution, we are satisfied. It is more stable than ForiWeb."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the security features and the protection."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the balancer and you can change policies very easily."
"The anti-bot protection is the solution's most valuable feature. Safe-guard or credential staffing are also useful features."
"The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its ability to have a pool of resources that can distribute your traffic, and that is a plus for me. My company tried to look into a competitor, Imperva, but it was lacking that capability, so F5 Advanced WAF outperforms Imperva."
"The solution's most valuable features include application DDoS protection, bot blocking, and HTTP header verifications."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the overall capabilities, there is not a comparable solution on the market."
"It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements."
 

Cons

"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."
"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."
"It was costlier than other solutions."
"Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement."
"I do not know if it is already there, but I would like to have complete visibility between the posture management and firewall as a service."
"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."
"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."
"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."
"F5 Advanced needs to improve its bot protection. The solution needs to have machine learning to learn the behavior of the customer to recognize the human versus the bot. This is a difficult feature to explain to our customers. I would like documentation about the bot feature to make it easier for the customer to understand."
"Support is a little slow."
"One area for improvement in the product is its SSO integration, which posed challenges and required significant effort to resolve."
"The pricing could be more flexible."
"The delay times on firmware patches and software updates could be better and improved."
"Scalability could be improved."
"The user interface (UI) seems a bit outdated. Making it more user-friendly would be beneficial."
"The deployment side is quite complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"The pricing is not that expensive considering what it offers."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"It is reasonable as compared to the other solutions."
"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"F5 Advanced WAF's pricing is high."
"There is an annual subscription for this solution."
"I would rate the pricing as seven out of ten"
"There are different licenses available to use F5 Advanced WAF, such as BT, ASM, and LPM."
"There are various plans available for Fortinet FortiWeb Cloud WAF as a Service, including a trial version."
"I think the price is very high."
"F5 Advanced WAF is not a cost-effective solution. Although they are attempting to reduce prices with their VE and cloud options, they are more expensive than other solutions. The solution is more expensive on average."
"Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
801,634 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Security Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudGuard for Application Security?
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-inspe...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF. I would rate the cost of Check Point CloudGuard WAF as eight out of ten, with ten being the most costly.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's code could be improved. While the GUI allows configuration for application-related features, specific definitions cannot be modified through the code. Ideally, we would...
What do you like most about F5 Advanced WAF?
It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Advanced WAF?
I would rate the pricing as seven out of ten. Sometimes, for specific models, additional licenses over the standard one need to be purchased. F5 Advanced WAF doesn't offer a single license that fit...
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
More legacy protocols should be added to the solution. The aforementioned protocols are generally less used and might have been phased out from multiple solutions. But some of the large corporation...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. F5 Advanced WAF and other solutions. Updated: September 2024.
801,634 professionals have used our research since 2012.