Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
7th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Container Security (6th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Compliance Management (4th)
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
2nd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (4th), Microsegmentation Software (2nd)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
8th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Container Management (6th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

PK
Jun 4, 2024
Improves our cloud security, is flexible, and user-friendly
The solution is easy to use. The evidence-based reporting is helpful to our DevOps team who manually mitigate the vulnerabilities. Singularity Cloud Security offers a flexible agentless vulnerability scanning solution that allows me to receive alerts directly to my personal email, a feature missing from AWS GuardDuty. Evidence-based reporting that demonstrates how a vulnerability can be exploited is crucial because it allows me to prioritize alerts based on their severity level. This ensures I focus on the most critical issues first. Singularity Cloud Security has improved our organization's security by proactively identifying vulnerabilities that could have significant detrimental effects. It has decreased the number of false positives. Before implementing Singularity Cloud Security our mean time to detection was three to four days. Singularity Cloud Security has significantly improved our mean time to remediation from one hour to just 15 minutes.
Uday Varma - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 30, 2024
Offers granular control and ease of policy creation with features like telemetry and micro-segmentation but incident tagging is missing
Our customers use the solution for micro-segmentation within the data center or cloud environments. One customer uses it for their on-premises infrastructure, deployed at the code level across their massive network. Another customer uses it in a data center to monitor microsegmentation for their 500-node workload. Moreover, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation has helped our customers manage and secure traffic between different applications or workloads. Earlier, they were using VMware NSX-v, which offered good logging for distributed services on an analytical level. However, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation provides them with better overall visibility and granular control over-segmentation, even for inter-application and inter-routing traffic.
Prateek Agarwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 26, 2024
A reliable platform for protecting and monitoring cloud-native applications
Previously, we did not have a cloud-native security solution. After implementing Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP, we found that our cloud-native applications are running very well. It is reliable, and all unwanted security threats are now blocked. We have complete peace of mind about our cloud-native applications. It took us seven to eight months to realize its benefits. We use CloudGuard CNAPP's Cloud Security Posture Management capabilities. They are very helpful. There is run-time protection. Actionable security is one of the main features. If we already have policy configurations within our applications, it does not affect our existing policies. We can easily configure the settings and the related functionalities. It provides flexibility. Cloud Security Posture Management identifies the risks that are most critical to our business. We have identified high risks, medium risks, and low risks. It can provide risk management for all three categories. We generally have high-risk and medium-risk vulnerabilities with us. The time savings vary from risk to risk. It typically gets resolved within a day or at the most within two days. We use CloudGuard CNAPP's CloudGuard Workload Protection capabilities. It has full integration capabilities with all the containers within the file systems. It is fully capable of integrating with any medium and providing the best security solutions. The scanning provided by CloudGuard Workload Protection helps us identify problems before they go live. It helps with pre-analysis. It gives us a pre-analysis report before running things in production. It is important because it saves time and costs. The costs are higher once you deploy the solution. It provides visibility before the deployment. We use CloudGuard CNAPP's CloudGuard CDR capabilities. It is their intelligence security threat system. It is very helpful for any kind of incident management and resolution. We can analyze the logs and try to provide the best possible solution. CloudGuard CDR's intrusion detection and threat-hunting capabilities work fine. CloudGuard CDR helps to detect anomalous behavior and respond to threats before they become an issue. Anomalous behavior detection is fast, but automation with AI and ML is required.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"The UI is very good."
"Cloud Native Security is user-friendly. Everything in the Cloud Native Security tool is straightforward, including detections, integration, reporting, etc. They are constantly improving their UI by adding plugins and other features."
"Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"The tool is a complete package that offers many features like visibility. You can get a graph with real-time workflows and visibility into server-to-server communication. We get visibility into many things happening within our environment."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"The reporting against compliance is an important feature that helps you comply with policies and standards within your organization."
"It has great scalability."
"The feature that I find most valuable is the blocking feature."
"It helps us to analyze vulnerabilities way before they get installed in production and the web. It gives us more security in the production environment."
"I love the work involved in maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds using this solution, versus using native native cloud security controls. It is so much better. The different cloud platforms all have their own way that they handle a lot of the stuff that Dome9 handles. Even within their platform, they are in a lot of disparate places, e.g., in AWS, there are five different tools. You have to jump between them to get the same information that you can just pull in automatically on Dome9, which is just one platform. We are using multiple platforms, so that makes it even more complicated and time consuming if you had to just rely on them to get all of your information. Whereas, it's all just summarized and put together on the Dome9 end."
"Assets Management as it provide complete visibility of our workload inkling EC2 instance or Serverless"
"The identification of misconfigurations, maintenance of compliance in a centralized way, and visibility across all the multi-cloud tenants are the key functionalities."
"The automatic learning and an AI engine help to find more modern vulnerability problems."
 

Cons

"When we get a new finding from PingSafe, I wish we could get an alert in the console, so we can work on it before we see it in the report. It would be very useful for the team that is actively working on the PingSafe platform, so we can close the issue the same day before it appears in the daily report."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"PingSafe filtering has some areas that cause problems, and to achieve single sign-on functionality, a break-glass feature, which is currently unavailable, is necessary."
"The Infrastructure as Code service available in PingSafe and the services available in AWS cloud security can be merged so that we can get the security data directly from AWS cloud in PingSafe. This way, all the data related to security will be in one single place. Currently, we have to check a couple of things on PingSafe, and we have to validate that same data on the AWS Cloud to be sure. If they can collaborate like that, it will be great."
"It took us a while to configure the software to work well in this type of environment, as the support documents were not always clear."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"We're looking for a solution that can incorporate legacy infrastructure for some of our business needs."
"Down the road, we would like to see automation. That is probably a feature that most people want. If they can automate patching a vulnerability, it will be much easier."
"The main issue that we found with Dome9 is that we have a default rule set with better recommendations that we want to use. So, you do a clone of that rule set, then you do some tweaks and customizations, but there is a problem. When they activate the default rule set with the recommendations and new security measures, it doesn't apply the new security measures to your clones profile. Therefore, you need to clone the profile again. We are already writing a report to Check Point."
"I would like them to include support for their products in languages other than English."
"I would like to see Test B functions at the application access level."
"Timely updates and upgrades to meet modern technological changes could help improve performance and limit the chances of downtime."
"The setup can be better. With every other Check Point product, the setup is scripted. You just approve versions, and then you are off. The setup for this solution is still very much manual. I would like to see that transition to more of a scripted setup."
"In Dome9, there should be a policy validation option where we can validate the policy before we push it into production."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is cost-efficient."
"PingSafe is cost-effective for the amount of infrastructure we have. It's reasonable for what they offer compared to our previous solution. It's at least 25 percent to 30 percent less."
"Pricing is based on modules, which was ideal for us."
"The pricing is fair. It is not inexpensive, and it is also not expensive. When managing a large organization, it is going to be costly, but it meets the business needs. In terms of what is out there on the market, it is fair and comparable to what I have seen, so I do not have any complaints about the cost"
"The tool is cost-effective."
"Its pricing is okay. It is in line with what other providers were providing. It is not cheap. It is not expensive."
"PingSafe's primary advantage is its ability to consolidate multiple tools into a single user interface, but, beyond this convenience, it may not offer significant additional benefits to justify its price."
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"Guardicore Centra provides better value for money than NSX, was the other solution that we looked at, which was too expensive for what it does."
"Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is expensive."
"This is not a cheap solution but you have to consider the bigger picture, which is what it is giving you."
"The solution is reasonably priced and I would rate it a six out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"The pricing is too high."
"GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
"The price is the same as other products in the market. There's no price argument to choose one or the other product, it will cost the customer approximately the same."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"The pricing is extremely competitive."
"The licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads (number of instances) within one license with no additional nor hidden charges. If you want to have 200 workloads under Dome9, then you need to take out two licenses for that. Also, it does not have any impact on cloud billing, as data is shared using the API call. This is well within the limit of free API calls provided by the cloud provider."
"The pricing is tremendous and super cheap. It is shockingly cheap for what you get out of it. I am happy with that. I hope that doesn't get reported back and they increase the prices. I love the pricing and the licensing makes sense. It is just assets: The more stuff that you have, the more you pay."
"The solution’s pricing is a little bit high."
"The licensing part still needs some work. The issue that I have is that we do not use all the services in the cloud, but sometimes, CloudGuard identifies them as an asset."
"Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is always known as a good solution but an expensive one. When you're using Cisco, Check Point, or Palo Alto, you know that you will pay more, but you know that it will work."
"From a pricing perspective, they are pretty expensive."
"The pricing of Check Point is very reasonable. Cisco is a very big brand, so the pricing is quite high. We want a solution that fits into our pocket and has all the features. They can improve the licensing model for small and mid-sized organizations. It suits large companies but not small and mid-sized organizations."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud and Data Center Security solutions are best for your needs.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Security Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
When I joined my organization, I saw that PingSafe was already implemented. I started to use the tool's alerting feat...
What do you like most about Guardicore Centra?
Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Guardicore Centra?
The pricing is too high. Based on market standards, I'd recommend lowering the price. I would rate the pricing a five...
What needs improvement with Guardicore Centra?
Customers would want to see the cost improved.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Guardicore Centra, GuardiCore
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Santander, Frontier Airlines, OpenLink, Intermountain Healthcare, Cellcom, BancoBASE
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.