Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Spirent CyberFlood comparison

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Spirent CyberFlood

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)

Spirent CyberFlood

Ranking in Application Security Tools

35th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (32nd)

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 Spirent CyberFlood is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo

Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.

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.

Read full review

Jos Badimo

Director at BAMS

Test assurance improves compliance and products with good performance

The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one screen most of the time. Even if the system navigates me to another screen, it should effectively return me to the main screen.

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

"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%."

"It helps us streamline our revenue streams, and we're spending less money on application security."

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

"The ability to preemptively block zero day attacks and detect hidden anomalies is exactly its advantage."

"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."

"It offers good functionality of the application that is currently running."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF works well for preemptively blocking Zero Day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies."

"The tool helps us to block IPs and applications."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."

"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."

"CyberFlood is flexible."

"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."

"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."

Cons

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security needs to improve updates on integrations. It also needs to incorporate real-time monitoring features."

"They need improved latency in the main window."

"The coding configurations can be simplified to save time for IT teams and developers."

"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."

"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."

"One of the big problems we found in Check Point, in general, is the support."

"For now, the product is doing all that I need, however, I need the support of IPv6."

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

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."

"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."

"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."

"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."

"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."

"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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 base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."

"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."

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

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

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

"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"

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."

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

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

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

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 do you like most about Spirent CyberFlood?

CyberFlood is flexible.

What needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?

What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?

I have been using the solution for a year now. The customers I work with are focused on both custom test assurance and test automation. The solution is utilized in the financial services sector and...

Imperva Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Comparisons

Compared 19% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 15% 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 12% of the time

open-appsec vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 10% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

Ixia BreakingPoint vs Spirent CyberFlood

Compared 78% of the time

Ixia BreakingPoint VE vs Spirent CyberFlood

Compared 22% of the time

More Spirent CyberFlood Competitors

Product Reports

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Application Security Tools

Download Spirent CyberFlood product report

Also Known As

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

CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing

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.

Check Point Software Technologies

Spirent’s revolutionary CyberFlood security and application testing solution is now available as a virtual platform offering you simplified use, by consolidating multiple test functions into a completely virtual test environment.

Spirent

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

Digicel

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Spirent CyberFlood