Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Mend.io comparison

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Read 29 Mend.io reviews

8,259 Views
4,894 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Mend.io and Check Point CloudGuard WAF are two contenders in the realm of web application security. Mend.io has the upper hand in pricing and support, whereas Check Point CloudGuard WAF is preferred for its comprehensive features, which justify its cost.

Features: Mend.io offers extensive integration capabilities, automation in vulnerability management, and efficiency in securing applications. Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides robust security measures, real-time traffic analysis, and advanced security capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Mend.io could improve with a simpler configuration process, enhanced reporting tools, and a more intuitive interface. Check Point CloudGuard WAF would benefit from better customization options, streamlined configuration, and easier navigation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Mend.io deployment is straightforward and accompanied by supportive customer service, despite some initial setup complexity. Check Point CloudGuard WAF deployment is complex but supported by an accessible service team.

Pricing and ROI: Mend.io offers competitive pricing with high ROI through efficient processes and lower setup costs. Check Point CloudGuard WAF requires a higher initial investment but provides ROI through its extensive protection and feature-rich offerings.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Mend.io Report (Updated: October 2024).

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Mend.io

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 813,161 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Ranking in Application Security Tools

10th

Average Rating

8.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)

Mend.io

Ranking in Application Security Tools

17th

Average Rating

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (7th), Static Code Analysis (4th), Software Supply Chain Security (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2024, 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 Mend.io is 3.3%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Ashish Upadhyay

Founder at BlockMosiac

Mar 18, 2024

Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability

There is room for improvement in the pricing strategy. By reducing their cost and extending the trial period, Check Point can attract more partnerships and customers, keeping up with other vendors in the field. It has a trial period, but they can extend it so we can better evaluate how it's working in our environment and how well it is suited. It should be converted to activate some discounts on buying standard versions. This will attract more of us, and we'll get more time to check the application and how it works. Additionally, their effort to involve IT teams would mean continuous adaptation to meet business requirements. This can help with the price picture and increasing the trial period so we can better evaluate the cost-effectiveness. Also, Check Point need to continue developing new features and arrangements in line with changing business requirements. The analysis time while it analyzes itself is very time-consuming. They need to improve the latency and minimize the steps involved. Also, the documentation needs to be updated, more improved, and simplified... so that even a beginner can start with this application. It can make things more beginner-friendly. Also, Check Point can bring some updates to the integration features with other security solutions, making it easier to integrate. For instance, it needs to integrate with solutions someone might have various firewall solutions from IBM and others, depending on which ones the business wants to integrate with.

Read full review

Jeffrey Harker

System Manager of Cloud Engineering at Common Spirit

May 12, 2022

Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up

Finding vulnerabilities is pretty easy. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) does a great job of that and we had quite a few when we first put this in place. Governance up until that time had been manual and when we tried to do manual governance of a large codebase, our chances of success were pretty minimal. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) does a very good job of finding the open-source, checking the versions, and making sure they're secure. They notify us of critical high, medium, and low impacts, and if anything is wrong. We find the product very easy to use and we use it as a core part of our strategy for scanning product code moving toward release. We use Mend (formerly WhiteSource) Smart Fix. I’d say pretty much everything in Mend (formerly WhiteSource) is easy to use. We really don't have too much difficulty using the product at all. I've implemented other scanners and tools and had much more trouble with those products than we've ever had with Mend (formerly WhiteSource). That’s extremely important. It's hard to sell to some of these teams to put any level of overhead on top of their product development efforts and the fact that Mend (formerly WhiteSource) is as easy as it is to use is a critical aspect of adoption here. It scores very highly on that scale. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) Smart Fix helps our developers fix vulnerable transitive dependencies. It's all very helpful to our development community. First of all, we're able to find that there are issues. Second of all, we're able to figure out very quickly what needs to be done to remediate the issues. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) helped reduce our mean time to resolution since adopting it. A lot of it is process improvement and technical aspects that can tell us how to go about remediating the issues. We get that out of Mend (formerly WhiteSource). Making the developers aware that these issues are there and insisting they be corrected and making the effort to do that visibly is very valuable to us. Overall, Mend (formerly WhiteSource) helped dramatically reduce the number of open-source software vulnerabilities running in our production at any given point in time. I won't give metrics, however, it's fair to say that our state before and after Mend (formerly WhiteSource) is dramatically different and moved in a positive direction. Mend's ability to integrate our developer's existing workflows, including their IDE repository and CI is good. Azure DevOps is really important. That's what the pipelines are. That's a very important piece of the entire puzzle. If this was just an external scanner where periodically we'd go through and scan our repos and give them a report, we’d do that with pen testing products, for example, for security testing. The problem is, by the time they get those reports, they've already shipped the code to multiple environments and it's too late to stop the train. With these features being baked into the pipelines like this, they know immediately. As a result, we're able to quickly take action to remediate findings.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"After integrating AppSec with other applications, team members can easily work without fear of confidential information exposure."

"The portal is quite intuitive."

"It is a very scalable and stable solution."

"Machine learning is a valuable tool for this assessment because it allows for a two-phase approach: secure and non-secure."

"They offer free trials, which is quite appreciative and grabs more attention from new users and businesses."

"Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI."

"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."

"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."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"We use a lot of open sources with a variety of containers, and the different open sources come with different licenses. Some come with dual licenses, some are risky and some are not. All our three use cases are equally important to us and we found WhiteSource handles them decently."

"The vulnerability analysis is the best aspect of the solution."

"With the fix suggestions feature, not only do you get the specific trace back to where the vulnerability is within your code, but you also get fix suggestions."

"WhiteSource is unique in the scanning of open-source licenses. Additionally, the vulnerabilities aspect of the solution is a benefit. We don't use WhiteSource in the whole organization, but we use it for some projects. There we receive a sense of the vulnerabilities of the open-source components, which improves our security work. The reports are automated which is useful."

"The inventory management as well as the ability to identify security vulnerabilities has been the most valuable for our business."

"The overall support that we receive is pretty good. "

"The solution boasts a broad range of features and covers much of what an ideal SCA tool should."

"The results and the dashboard they provide are good."

More Mend.io pros

Cons

"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."

"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."

"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."

"They need improved latency in the main window."

"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."

"While the GUI allows configuration for application-related features, specific definitions cannot be modified through the code."

"It doesn't detect user activity like some of its competitors. It's not a vulnerability, but it's a legitimate activity that it doesn't detect. It only detects vulnerabilities or misconfigurations."

"They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"I would like to see the static analysis included with the open-source version."

"On the reporting side, they could make some improvements. They are making the reports better and better, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to generate a report for our entire organization."

"Needs better ACL and more role definitions. This product could be used by large organisations and it definitely needs a better role/action model."

"It would be nice to have a better way to realize its full potential and translate it within the UI or during onboarding."

"WhiteSource needs improvement in the scanning of the containers and images with distinguishing the layers."

"At times, the latency of getting items out of the findings after they're remediated is higher than it should be."

"I would like to have an additional compliance pack. Currently, it does not have anything for the CIS framework or the NIST framework. If we directly run a scan, and it is under the CIS framework, we can directly tell the auditor that this product is now CIS compliant."

"Some detected libraries do not specify a location of where in the source they were matched from, which is something that should be enhanced to enable quicker troubleshooting."

More Mend.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

"If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale"

"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."

"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."

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."

"The pricing is not that expensive considering what it offers."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"Over the last two years, they have tried to add more and more features to their license packages, but the price is a little bit high, comparatively."

"This is an expensive solution."

"Pricing and licensing are comparable to other tools. When we started, it was less than our existing solution. I can't go into specifics, but it isn't cheap."

"As we were using an SaaS-based service, the solution must be scalable, although my understanding is that this is based on the licensing model one is using."

"We always negotiate for the best price possible, and as far as I know, Mend has done an excellent job with their pricing. Our management is happy with the pricing, which has led to renewals."

"When comparing the price of WhiteSource to the competition it is priced well. The cost for 50 users is approximately $18,000 annually."

"Pricing is competitive."

"We are paying a lot of money to use WhiteSource. In our company, it is not easy to argue that it is worth the price. "

More Mend.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

813,161 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Security Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Insurance Company

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?

Pricing is a bit high, but it is justified considering the features and support provided by Check Point.

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

When I was working with the WAF platform, there were limitations, particularly concerning compliance and reporting. Managing multiple tools for different functions like WAF, firewall, CDN solutions...

How does WhiteSource compare with SonarQube?

Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, ea...

How does WhiteSource compare with Black Duck?

We researched Black Duck but ultimately chose WhiteSource when looking for an application security tool. WhiteSource is a software solution that enables agile open source security and license compl...

What do you like most about Mend.io?

The best feature is that the Mend R&D team does their due diligence for all the vulnerabilities. In case they observe any important or critical vulnerabilities, such as the Log4j-related vulner...

Imperva Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Comparisons

Compared 22% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 19% of the time

SonarQube vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 17% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 14% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 10% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

SonarQube vs Mend.io

Compared 26% of the time

Black Duck vs Mend.io

Compared 15% of the time

Snyk vs Mend.io

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs Mend.io

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Mend.io

Compared 6% of the time

More Mend.io Competitors

Product Reports

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

October 2024

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Download Mend.io product report

September 2024

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec

WhiteSource, Mend SCA, Mend.io Supply Chain Defender, Mend SAST

Learn More

Video not available

Check Point Software Technologies

Overview

Check Point CloudGuard WAF (Web Application Firewall) is a cloud-native security solution designed to protect web applications and APIs from known and unknown threats. It employs contextual AI and machine learning to prevent zero-day attacks without relying on traditional signature-based detection methods, ensuring that applications remain secure even as new threats emerge.

CloudGuard WAF offers preemptive protection against vulnerabilities by using machine learning to identify and block zero-day threats like Log4Shell and Spring4Shell. It provides precise detection capabilities, minimizing the need for constant fine-tuning and reducing false positives. Designed for cloud-native environments, CloudGuard WAF integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, supporting automated deployment and configuration through infrastructure as code (IaC) or APIs.

Key Features of CloudGuard WAF:

ML-Based Threat Prevention: Stops application-layer attacks, including those listed in the OWASP Top 10, with minimal tuning and no reliance on signature updates.
API Discovery and Security: Identifies and secures APIs, preventing misuse and enforcing API schemas to protect against unauthorized access.
Bot and DDoS Prevention: Detects and mitigates automated attacks that can disrupt services or degrade customer experiences.
Intrusion Prevention (IPS): Provides protection against over 2,800 web-related CVEs using Check Point’s award-winning IPS technology.

Benefits of CloudGuard WAF:

Zero-Day Protection: Mitigates risks from newly discovered vulnerabilities without waiting for signature updates.
Reduced Operational Overhead: Eliminates the need for constant manual tuning and exception handling, simplifying security management.
Comprehensive API Security: Enhances control over your attack surface by discovering and securing all APIs, including shadow, rogue, and deprecated endpoints.
Fast and Easy Deployment: Deployable within minutes via WAF as a Service (WAFaaS), requiring only a one-time DNS configuration for immediate protection.

CloudGuard WAF is particularly suitable for organizations using modern, cloud-based architectures that require robust, automated security measures for both applications and APIs. Its capabilities are valuable for industries that handle sensitive data, such as finance or healthcare, where compliance and data protection are critical. Pricing and support are typically customized to the specific needs and scale of the deployment, with options for continuous updates and maintenance through Check Point's managed services.

CloudGuard WAF by Check Point provides advanced, AI-driven protection for web applications and APIs, offering automated, precise threat prevention and easy integration with cloud-native environments, ensuring robust security without the need for extensive manual configuration.

Mend.io is a software composition analysis tool that secures what developers create. The solution provides an automated reduction of the software attack surface, reduces developer burdens, and accelerates app delivery. Mend.io provides open-source analysis with its in-house and other multiple sources of software vulnerabilities. In addition, the solution offers license and policy violation alerts, has great pipeline integration, and, since it is a SaaS (software as a service), it doesn’t require you to physically maintain servers or data centers for any implementation. Not only does Mend.io reduce enterprise application security risk, it also helps developers meet deadlines faster.

Mend.io Features

Mend.io has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

Vulnerability analysis
Automated remediation
Seamless integration
Business prioritization
Limitless scalability
Intuitive interface
Language support
Integration
Continuous monitoring
Remediation suggestions
Customization

Mend.io Benefits

There are many benefits to implementing Mend.io. Some of the biggest advantages the solution offers include:

Easy to use: The Mend.io platform is very user-friendly and easy to set up.

Third-party libraries: The solution eases the process of keeping track of all the used third-party dependencies within a product. It not only scans for the pure occurrence (also transitively) but also takes care of licenses and vulnerabilities.

Static code analysis: With Mend.io’s static code analysis, you can quickly identify security weaknesses in custom code across desktop, web, and mobile applications.

Broad support: Mend.io provides 27 different programming languages and various programming frameworks.

Easy integration: Mend.io makes integration very easy with existing DevOps environments and CI/CD pipelines so developers don’t need to manually configure or trigger the scan.

Ultra-fast scanning engine: The solution’s scanning engine generates results up to ten times faster than legacy SAST solutions.

Unified developer experience: Mend.io has a unified developer experience inside the code repository that shows side-by-side security alerts and remediation suggestions for custom code and open-source code.

Reviews from Real Users

Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by PeerSpot users currently using the Mend.io solution.

Jeffrey H., System Manager of Cloud Engineering at Common Spirit, says, “Finding vulnerabilities is pretty easy. Mend.io (formerly WhiteSource) does a great job of that and we had quite a few when we first put this in place. Mend.io does a very good job of finding the open-source, checking the versions, and making sure they're secure. They notify us of critical high, medium, and low impacts, and if anything is wrong. We find the product very easy to use and we use it as a core part of our strategy for scanning product code moving toward release.”

PeerSpot reviewer Ben D., Head of Software Engineering at a legal firm, mentions, “The way WhiteSource scans the code is great. It’s easy to identify and remediate open source vulnerabilities using this solution. WhiteSource helped reduce our mean time to resolution since we adopted the product. In terms of integration, it's pretty easy.”

An IT Service Manager at a wholesaler/distributor comments, “Mend.io provides threat detection and an excellent UI in a highly stable solution, with outstanding technical support.”

Another reviewer, Kevin D., Intramural OfficialIntramural at Northeastern University, states, "The vulnerability analysis is the best aspect of the solution."

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

Microsoft, Autodesk, NCR, Target, IBM, vodafone, Siemens, GE digital, KPMG, LivePerson, Jack Henry and Associates