Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] Reviews

Check Point UTM-1 was a firewall solution that unified threats. The use of this tool was as an on-premise device since we needed security in the network to control incoming and outgoing traffic working in conjunction with security policies. It also features additional items, such as the antivirus capabilities that we implement on all devices, as well as intrusion prevention and VPN capabilities. It is an excellent tool that helped us to solve all the vulnerability problems that we presented while reducing security gaps.

Check Point UTM-1 helped us improve the incoming and outgoing traffic of our company and helped us improve security in order to be able to manage and identify various vulnerabilities.

We are able to help comply with the security policies and regulations that are required of us.

We managed to achieve excellent security in our on-premise environment. Currently, our environment is in the cloud, and we had to make some improvements in the software that was implemented at that time since we now work in a hybrid cloud environment.

We've had a need, for many years, to be able to establish a solution that would allow us to centralize and unify the management and analysis of a consolidated unified security in a single device. This would allow us to see that each of the features that Moss required to incorporate additionally did not require an expansion and were independently simplified and visible as a way to be able to manage and detect any this threat response in a faster efficient way and reduce the cost of ownership to our organization.

It allowed us to reduce the costs of property acquired in our organization so that the costs generated by security issues and the payment department were balanced with our organization's needs and current growth. 

The solution came to give us an elimination of having independent products such as antivirus firewalls and all the types of applications that were previously used for this type of content filtering. Now it is a single solution, and we are seeing that with the evolution of the years, it is a solution Check Point is already migrating to quantum and harmony.

We were developing something called a remote monitoring center and we wanted to have many plans logging into and having a VPN connection to their networks. 

The filtering was very good.

We use it as a perimeter firewall. We need to put all the security inside of our data center and Check Point was the first option to use it as the firewall in order to offer all of our services via the internet.

This solution improved our email service, with less presence on the internet blacklist.

Check Point is the brand that invented customer centricity when it comes to network security. SmartDashboard was there before many competitors were pushing administrators to the CLI, even for the simplest tasks. The ability to create a central database for objects (sources, destinations, services, etc.), which can be used in several different policies, and the possibility of browsing all logs (FW, IPs, identity awareness, etc.) from all the gateways from a unique screen are big pluses.

Successful implementation of central management allows my organization, which might be considered over-segmented with lots of firewalls, to make firewall changes easier and track possible problems faster.

We primarily use the solution as a firewall function for levels 3 and 4. 

The major improvement was the ability to have a very good log. We're able to log all details and troubleshoot when a problem occurs.

I found the batching part of Check Point very valuable. It is one part I really like about Check Point. I also like the way we connect to the monitoring. For example, in Cisco ASA we talk about FMC and we talk about like management center and the firewall. The way we get connected to the firewall is we can configure one firewall by using one management center. That approach is what I really like about Check Point because you can manage the Check Point firewall by using only one management center.

One more thing about the HTTPS, the SS encryption, and decryption - that is very secure. Those are the features that make me highly recommend that the client goes with Check Point, instead of another solution.

The solution should be more user-friendly. I know we can do a lot of the configuration using GUI or CLI. But they have to work more on their GUI. If they work more in the GUI I think many people will come to the solution.

The UTM platform has been the most valuable. It's a great system. It has the possibility of having several plates implemented on the same appliance. Currently, several other companies have other solutions implemented, but the first time I got acquainted with this was with Check Point.

The value can be improved. If we have a small company with less than twenty-five employees and only one central site, the opening range of Check Point is expensive.

The implementation of the rules could also be improved, as some other vendors have a cleaner and nicer interpretation of the rules and rules sets. Check Point, by inheritance of all of those different versions, makes it so it's not that straightforward. Once you get the mindset, it's clear. However, until you get the mindset, specifically on clients that are expecting to work with them, it is not that clear. In our case, we are focused mostly on Layer three, and not the universal ones that some other vendors implement.