What needs improvement with Check Point Infinity?

Some aspects of the reporting in Check Point may take time to learn and become comfortable with. Training is necessary for certain areas, as some features might not be as intuitive. It's important to understand the workflow and how various components function.

I would like to provide my feedback and confirm the reports. The report is the main thing because we have to prepare our representations for senior management on behalf of that report. The solution's reports should be easy to understand and work with.

We have had some performance issues. Because of this, we had to redirect traffic to be analyzed by other appliances. I'm not sure if higher-end appliances would still have this problem. We also experienced issues with deploying new configuration versions to all branch appliances, but we won't be using this setup anymore. We don't know exactly how the virtual appliances will work to protect the cloud. It's a new thing for us.

There is an issue with high agent size, which impacts performance. The EDR part should provide more features.

The tool's technical support lags.

While Check Point Infinity is good, there are instances where it may struggle to detect the most active ransomware or malware prevalent in cyberspace. It should prioritize enhancing the inclusivity of its scans to cover a broader range of threats, including worms and viruses, similar to the capabilities of products like Symantec or Microsoft Defender. Additionally, there should be a greater emphasis on integrating the antivirus solution with major cloud platforms such as AWS and Azure. The tool should focus on improving artificial intelligence and customer support services.

I've observed some challenges in terms of usability and performance, particularly since the shift to a service-oriented model like Infinity. It seems that the performance varies, likely influenced by the client's size and the provisioning of resources.

We'd like to see support for fiber connections. With the growth of the network, we would expect that more and more traffic is going through this device and soon enough, the bottleneck will be the type of connection being used to transfer data to the router and further to the ISP. A throughput of 1GBPS will hinder performance on the network. Configuring fault tolerance for specific features, for example, power sources would ensure that the chances of the system shutting down due to a power surge are highly limited. This can further increase the SLA to 99.99%

Endpoints are an area of concern when it comes to Check Point Infinity. There are some issues around the marketing of the endpoint solution, because of which it is not as prominent as other players in the market. The endpoint solutions offered by Check Point are not prominent enough in the market due to Check Point's poor marketing efforts. If the marketing for the endpoint solutions offered by Check Point is done properly, then Check Point can get a more thorough positioning in the marketplace.

Check Point Infinity is not compatible with Windows 8.

We need improvement around the Smart-1 cloud solution. It is included in the Infinity service, and it needs to be able to be restarted only from the background, with the brand's specialists - not done in an autonomous way. Developing this aspect and making it available to everyone consuming the services through the platform would help us manage many of the incidents due to cosmetic errors that can happen on the platform.

Check Point Infinity's web application is sometimes a little slow. It really is only a little slow, however, it is perceived that it is not normal to be that way. The performance of the site could be improved depending on the capabilities it has at the moment. There should be more documentation on these new technologies and administrative portals, in addition to including more tools from the manufacturer to finally have them all centralized to facilitate the client's administration from the same place without having any connectivity problems.

In the future, I would like to see new developments that allow us to centralize the cloud. Infinity Cloud is one of the most powerful clouds in security where a number of sites or technological capabilities have been established to protect our networks, our equipment, and our infrastructure, however, in the future what we could have is a comprehensive and novel way for new or additional features to protect services such as blockchain or web services3.

The management console has given us some trouble, and the documentation is a little bit rigid in its solution paths. We could use more audiovisual material with more examples of setups and configurations to minimize the need to discover the information we need in the extensive documents we have available. The support team is great. However, we don't want to be constantly on the phone with a technician for Q&A or even to open tickets to design our protocols the way the company requests them.

Some points of improvement of the centralized management tool may be the latency that is rarely provided when managing, for example, the smart cloud of Check Point for gateways. The console at the beginning also has the section on where to save the logs, however, if by mistake we choose a very remote area, this detail cannot be corrected unless the change of data center where the logs are housed, which is requested through support, which can become a management difficulty. As for support for modern and cloud-based tools, they are somewhat more difficult to solve quickly.

Check Point Infinity price could improve.

They need to update the guides. The product has improved a lot. However, its support guides are still the same as they were seven years ago. I say this from experience. For example, for configuration, it is necessary in some cases to consult these same guides and you see yourself looking at references the old information is still there. The support for Latin America is one of those that is also a bit neglected. We are without direct technicians speaking in Spanish. In some cases and their support is fast, however, this cultural shock makes interaction difficult, and when it comes to the escalation of the problems, mainly when the cases are urgent or escalated, the most experienced technicians only speak English.

One of the main improvements that can be made is the latency in the portal. It is one of the most common errors of the Check Point tools, another of the improvements is that the unlimited licenses are based on the number of users. This confuses larger organizations, where not all users need all services. Finally, they must improve the technical support they provide to users since we have opened several cases and they take time to attend to them or contact us, and in certain cases, they do not provide a quick solution. They take a long time to solve the error problem in question, which is worrying since, due to this inefficiency, they could attack the organization since there may be a gap in the infrastructure of the organization.

In general, Check Point can improve its documentation. Sometimes they are very old. They could include more examples to guide customers in their implementations. I have noticed that new technologies are more difficult to find guides. Without them, the objective to implement them correctly is not always achieved. On the other hand, I think it is good to improve the support service since it is somewhat slow for cloud issues, they are resolved, but after several weeks, I think the solution SLA should be improved. The portal is provisioned in AWS. They should improve the cloud to make it faster.

They can improve the latency of the portal. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. It is not a good image for the client, however, with all the functionalities that this application has, almost all of us forget the slowness of the portal. We would like to have more documentation for the new Check Point services which are very good but would be easier to implement. Licensing is sometimes complex to understand, a good partner is needed to help us with the issue.

The licensing model for Check Point Infinity is not clear. As infinity licenses are based on the number of users, it confuses larger organizations, where not every user needs every service. For example: For an organization size of more than 100,000 users, where only a few users need to have access to SandBlast Mobile for protecting their BYOD devices against threats, and there are a few users that need Capsule to access corporate data, and in addition, if the organization needs to protect all of the user's email accounts using Check Point Email Security, then it creates issues in terms of the license count. It is confusing when it comes to figuring out how to fulfill the requirements.

Even though we have had several support cases opened for the components of the Check Point Infinity architecture, as an administrator, I'm satisfied with the solution and the abilities it provides. I can't describe any disadvantages at the moment, except for the overall price of purchasing and maintaining the entire set of components. I think that the pricing for the Check Point products should be reconsidered, as we found it to be quite expensive to purchase and to maintain. Maintenance requires that the licenses and the support services be prolonged regularly. Alternatively, they should create some additional bundles of the software blades with significant discounts in addition to the current Next Generation Threat Prevention & SandBlast (NGTX) and Next Generation Threat Prevention (NGTP) offers.

We recently upgraded to the latest release of the new version, IP40. Since it is new, whatever features that were not there in the IP30 version, have been added to IP40. Right now, we are gradually going through it, so I cannot say what might be lacking just yet. Technical support is something that needs improvement.