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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs HackerOne comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)
HackerOne
Ranking in Application Security Tools
30th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (38th), Bug Bounty Platforms (1st), Penetration Testing Services (1st), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HackerOne is 0.1%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects our web applications and APIs and has a very low false positive rate
CloudGuard WAF is a very straightforward solution. I do not have to worry about signatures. Most of the solutions that are out there are mainly based on signatures, and I have to do a lot of maintenance to get the signature updates, and sometimes, due to a lack of resources, I am not able to do so. With CloudGuard WAF, I have peace of mind, because most of the features are AI-based, and there is not much configuration that needs to be done on my side. Once set, I only go to CloudGuard WAF to check. I do not have to worry about signatures or updates. Everything is done perfectly, and I have a sense of peace because I know our applications are safe. It is very important for us that CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. That is definitely one of the key features I need.
Faizan Nehal - PeerSpot reviewer
Platform supports skill development with effective vulnerability reporting
Everything has become slower on HackerOne. I have noticed that older researchers receive all the private invites while newer ones receive fewer. The same goes for real-life events, where the same people are invited repeatedly. There are no clear guidelines for being invited to programs and conferences, and the process for receiving invitations appears arbitrary.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The DirectStorage gives me a vision that I did not have of the check that occurs on the web servers."
"By using a cloud application security solution, our company can save costs by reducing the need for additional security hardware and software and improving operational efficiency."
"They offer free trials, which is quite appreciative and grabs more attention from new users and businesses."
"Overall, the product is excellent."
"The solution offers sophisticated security techniques with unique characteristics that can be particularly valuable for the financial sector, which is where we develop apps."
"The most valuable feature we have found in Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its rich logging capabilities."
"Whenever there was a new CVE, Check Point CloudGuard WAF used to block them."
"I rate it ten out of ten."
"HackerOne is larger than WebCloud and has a better reputation than BugCloud, which results in a smoother process."
"The most valuable feature of HackerOne is its variety of programs. These programs provide depth into various areas, such as mobile, API, and websites."
"It helps me to get new sales, profits, and other benefits."
"Apart from getting all the bug bounty opportunities, we also get the chance to practice in a safe environment, like a demo setup. These features are great for beginners who want to explore bug bounties in the future."
"HackerOne is larger than WebCloud and has a better reputation than BugCloud, which results in a smoother process."
 

Cons

"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."
"They might be able to add more integrations."
"The reporting can be improved."
"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations. It took approximately a month and a half to understand how the solution works because of inadequate documentation."
"One of the big problems we found in Check Point, in general, is the support."
"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."
"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"One issue I've experienced is traffic. Many people try to participate when an opportunity with a bounty of around 1,000-15,000 dollars comes up. In this case, the first person to report the vulnerability gets the bounty. If a second person reports the same vulnerability, they are marked as duplicated instead of receiving some recognition. The second person also invested time finding the issue, so I think this can be improved."
"Everything has become slower on HackerOne. I have noticed that older researchers receive all the private invites while newer ones receive fewer."
"The ability to view the conversation between the triagers and the programs will be really good."
"Everything has become slower on HackerOne."
"Response time can be improved. The HackerOne Trust team can be slow to respond sometimes. They're not using AI, which could help reduce the number of duplicate reports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"I work for an Indian banking client. In India, companies are on a budget. The company liked Check Point very much, but it was a little bit costly compared to FortiWeb. However, it had more features compared to FortiWeb."
"The sales team or account managers from Check Point are top-notch. As I am using other products as well, my pricing was competitive compared to others."
"The tool is open-source and free for bug bounty hunters."
"The solution is free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudGuard for Application Security?
We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
As Infiniti customers, the pricing is manageable, as we have allowances dedicated to each Check Point product. The price is not as high compared to other options I have dealt with in the past. Rega...
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
We are satisfied with the product because it does what we need it to do, but one thing that I would like to see improved in the product is the protection of our mobile applications. When I migrate ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HackerOne?
The cost is rated as one since there is no need to pay anything, not even a fee or commission.
What needs improvement with HackerOne?
Everything has become slower on HackerOne. I have noticed that older researchers receive all the private invites while newer ones receive fewer. The same goes for real-life events, where the same p...
What is your primary use case for HackerOne?
My use case is similar to DuckTron. The processes I use for DuckTron are exactly the same for HackerOne. Therefore, there isn't much of a difference. I use HackerOne for finding vulnerabilities and...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
HackerOne Assets, HackerOne Pentesting Services, HackerOne Security Assessments, HackerOne Vulnerability Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Zenefits, Adobe, Yelp
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. HackerOne and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.