Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) Reviews

I work for Check Point as a distributor here in Sri Lanka, and I serve as the technical architect.

We provide the entire Check Point stack, including Check Point firewalls, Check Point Email Security, and Check Point ERM. We also offer Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security), though it has limited adoption in the Sri Lankan market with only a few customers. We have one customer for Check Point WAF.

We operate as a value-added distributor, providing sales support along with implementation assistance, POCs, solution architecting, and comprehensive support services.

In the Sri Lankan market, we recommend Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) to manufacturing industries and conglomerates who are on their cloud journey. However, we have a substantial market for firewalls among banks, though they are not yet ready to transition to the cloud. Therefore, our primary focus is approaching the manufacturing industry and conglomerates.

I believe the VDOM functionality from the firewall side, particularly the virtual firewalls, could be improved. For multiple virtual firewalls in cloud instances, it would be beneficial to optimize this aspect and provide consistent security levels across all instances where multiple micro-segmentation networks exist in the cloud.

One area for improvement involves policy optimization at the VDOM level to enable simultaneous policy enforcement. The policy configuration is somewhat complicated compared to other vendors in the market, and simplification would be advantageous. Enhanced ecosystem integration would also be valuable.

Additionally, incorporating CSPM into Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) portfolio would improve visibility on the application side of the cloud network, not only on the network side but also on the application side. We expect these features because vendors like Palo Alto provide comprehensive cloud security. We want our customers to experience Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) as a comprehensive cloud security platform rather than simply a cloud firewall.

Currently, we have one customer using Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security), and they are satisfied. However, we need to complete an integration with a Nutanix environment for the hybrid component that the customer requested. This integration has not yet been delivered by Check Point. Once this is properly addressed, the customer will be fully satisfied with the platform.

We have not yet completed the integration and are about to begin the integration process.

Overall, I have been working with Check Point for approximately five years.

For this specific customer, the implementation of Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) was very smooth. However, regarding the VDOM component, the customer expected it to be at a more optimal level rather than being complicated regarding policy enforcement for the multiple micro-segmented environment. Other than that, everything functioned well.

Technical support is excellent, and we have a country SE who provides support. The TAC support is also strong. The support from TAC has been consistently good, and there is nothing negative to comment on regarding that aspect.

The setup process is straightforward and easy.

Competition with Fortinet in the Sri Lankan market is limited, as they are considerably cheaper and claim to address customer requirements. When approaching this market, Check Point pricing is somewhat expensive. We reduced our prices to acquire that customer, but I think that if pricing could be lowered further, we could approach other sectors where price is a critical evaluation factor. Better pricing in relation to competition would provide us an advantage in promoting Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) in this market. My overall review rating for Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) is nine out of ten.

My main use case for Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is strengthening cloud security posture, monitoring configurations, identifying risks earlier, and keeping workloads aligned with compliance requirements.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP offers continuous posture monitoring, risk prioritization, and automated remediation guidance as some of its best features.

The automated remediation guidance in Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP has made it easier because it points directly to what needs fixing and suggests the exact steps, so I spend less time digging for a root cause. For example, when it flagged an overly permissive IAM policy, the guidance made it quick to tighten it up without guesswork.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP has positively impacted my organization by making a clear difference in reducing the time spent tracking down cloud misconfigurations and helping teams focus on the issues that matter most. The clearer visibility and faster risk triage have made day-to-day security work noticeably smoother.

I have noticed specific outcomes with Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP, including a clear drop in recurring configuration issues, and the time spent reviewing alerts has gone down quite a bit. The prioritization helps me get to the important items faster.

A typical day using Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP usually involves running posture checks to spot new misconfigurations and reviewing the alerts it surfaces so I can address issues before they turn into real problems.

One area that Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP could use improvement is the navigation when switching between modules. A more streamlined interface and a quicker drill-down into findings would make the workflow feel even smoother.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP for about two years.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP demonstrates strong security visibility and posture checks, but the interface still feels somewhat clunky. I rate Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP an eight out of ten.

We are primarily on-premise. We also use Azure for cloud services, mostly for VPN. We use it as the active directory to authorize access to the VPN, which is helpful. 

However, as a healthcare organization in Germany, it is very challenging to get cloud solutions like CloudGuard approved. Cloud solutions must be located in Germany or Frankfurt, where all the data centers are situated. This requirement makes it somewhat difficult, however, otherwise, it is manageable.

We have a lot of audits in the healthcare industry and Check Point has become an industry standard.

One aspect I appreciate is that it is not overly complicated. Many solutions are sometimes difficult to set up. Check Point has been very straightforward. Especially in the last one to two years, it has become easier to manage with each patch. I have several coworkers who have used it for a long time, and they all mentioned that it was much more difficult to use or update five years ago. It has become less complex to use yet more complex in terms of infrastructure. 

Check Point offers unified security management across hybrids, clouds, as well as on on-premise. We have Azure for cloud, however it is mostly for VPN. We have the active directory to get to authorize yourself into the VPN. CloudGuard helps with that. As a healthcare organization in Germany, it's very difficult to get approval for clouds. If you want to have the cloud approved, it has to be in Germany or in Frankfurt where all the data centers are. That makes it a little bit difficult to be on cloud vs on-prem. Other than that, it's fine.

I honestly do not know how it can be improved anymore. There are probably people with more knowledge or experience who could suggest improvements. Most of the solutions we have used have been straightforward and effective. 

Occasionally, there is a strange bug, however, we just contact Check Point for a hotfix if we are a significant client. And since that is our situation, the solution works. 

There might be a possibility for Check Point to offer more training opportunities for users to get to know the solution better, perhaps through courses or similar resources. However, it depends on our company's arrangements with Check Point. In our case, we have a vendor involved. Everything we do with Check Point must go through the vendor first, which is somewhat inconvenient. It would be easier to deal with Check Point directly, however, it depends on the vendor. 

There is a wealth of material available online for those technically inclined. In this fast-paced industry, we must continue learning. Courses or online meetings, like Zoom or Teams sessions, for one or two hours each week, would be helpful. 

Despite using it for a long time, there are always new features. For example, just last week, I discovered a new feature that had been in the software for years yet it was not visible due to its placement behind multiple menus. Teaching sessions would be beneficial, yet it is our responsibility to learn, so we cannot entirely rely on Check Point.

We have been using Check Point for at least ten years now. Our organization has used it for that long. It's a healthcare system with 130 hospitals. 

The solution is stable. Most Check Point solutions are stable.

Since we are primarily using Azure, scalability is not currently a concern. It could become relevant in the future, but as a healthcare organization, transitioning to the cloud is challenging, especially in Germany.

Customer service depends on the issue. Sometimes, there are bugs, and we have to wait for a customized patch. For instance, we had a random bug where CPU usage spiked inexplicably, preventing access to the appliances. Restarting resolved the issue, but the cause remains unknown. 

Typically, we deal with our partner and they advise us to create a Check Point ticket. It raises the question of why we have a partner. I do not deal with customer support often, however, if I report a bug, it is resolved within a month or two. It is not usually a critical bug, just minor issues that prompt curiosity.

Positive

90% to 95% of our infrastructure is on-premises in order to connect it to the cloud. 

The deployment was handled by someone else. I simply work with it. 

The point of Check Point isn't necessarily to gain an ROI. A company just has to pay the price. You don't get money out of it. 

I'm not directly aware of the pricing. Most Check Point solutions are costly, however, they are the industry standard, so the cost is necessary. Especially in a healthcare organization, skimping on IT security is inadvisable. Losing patient data could cost four percent of an organization's annual revenue. 

For an organization with twenty billion euros in revenue, four percent is significant. Also, we have limited flexibility with licensing, though we sometimes receive better prices through vendors. The company likely paid over thirty million euros to Check Point. However, the technology ensures a high-security standard. 

Many large German companies also use Check Point.

I'm unsure if the company has evaluated other options. 

I have never been involved in the decision to use this solution; I am just the end user.

Flagger Network Security and Check Point work effectively. I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

I came from a compliance world where I focused on static configuration checks. I have now evolved more towards a CDR approach, where I actively monitor cloud detection and response as well. I am monitoring activities in the clouds, including Azure, AWS, and Oracle, OCI.

I transitioned from unstructured cloud environments, described as a bit like the Wild West, lacking oversight. Now, I have established specific rule sets based on compliance standards, which I have adapted to suit my use case. CloudGuard greatly assists me in understanding my assets, assessing my security, and identifying risk areas.

The compliance is well executed, and the CDR is evolving, with both progressing well. 

We use the CloudGuard CNAPP CloudGuard Security Posture Management capabilities. It's good for identifying misconfiguration. You have a a variety of rulesets that you can apply. So you can choose on depending on which on which industry standard that you are following. And you can really adapt it towards your environment, so you can mix and match what you need and really come to a more secure cloud environment.  

The effectiveness of its cloud security posture management for providing compliance rule sets and security best practices has been good. You can define KPIs in CNAPP. You can say: "this is the percentage that we want to work towards." And you can see your progress and say, "okay, at the beginning of the month, we are we are at 60%. And at the end of the year, we are there 80% compliance." You can do that. And you can really monitor it.

The cloud security posture management identify the risks that are the most critical to our business. We can define certain key assets that are your crown jewels. And whenever something hits on these crown jewels, you get a very high score. So you can really fine tune towards protecting your risk based assets in the cloud. 

It also lowered the amount of time it takes when identifying of the most critical risks. If I would do that manually, it would take me ages. So when I have a fine tuned rule set that I that I apply upon all my workloads, I do have automatic identification of every resource. The time savings are indefinite.

The CloudGuard CNAPP visibility into CloudGuard logs for simplifying incident investigation is very good. It can reach CloudGuard VPC flow logs and GoToKey events, and it can also look at Azure activity logs. So you can have multi cloud capability, CDR, and you have different rule sets that are quite good. So far, it's excellent.

The CDR helps detect anomalous behavior and respond to threats before they become an issue. We had we had some third party products that were using that was not properly configured. CDR detected this when it was doing certain certain scans. We updated the role towards the policy that that CDR provided, and it really helped. The events went away. 

The user interface needs work. Sometimes, it is a transition from the old tool to the new CNAPP Two that I currently have, and remnants of the old environment can still be detected. I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel. 

More work is needed in fine-tuning the threat data towards your CSPM and activity logs, aligning them with business intelligence, which requires a cohesive console interface.

My assessment of CloudGuard CDRs in intrusion detection and threat hunting capabilities is that it still needs some work. All the threat data that comes in, you need to fine tune it a bit.  

I have used the solution for four years.

The stability could always improve. It is an ever-changing world. It is rapidly evolving, and sometimes mistakes occur, necessitating testing. Every cloud security provider experiences challenges like that.

The solution scales well. You just apply the the policy and the rule sets. You apply your configuration, and it scales indefinitely.

I have a dedicated support engineer and a presales engineer dedicated to me. Additionally, I have a project manager. Overall, it's a good setup.

Positive

I used the Security Hub inside AWS. CloudGuard offers more rule sets and is better streamlined.

The initial setup was a bit cumbersome in the in the beginning, however, it improved a lot. Now it's it's working fine. 

I am the integrator that handles the initial setup.

Monitoring cloud security automatically ensures a return on investment. When I deploy applications in a UAT environment, setting rule sets beforehand guarantees adherence. When deviations occur, corrections are made, thereby ensuring compliance.

From a licensing and cost perspective, it is really competitive. It is one of the better options available.

Before switching, I evaluated solutions like Palo Alto, Prisma CloudGuard, Trend Micro Cloud Conformity, and now I use CNAPP Pro. The deciding factor for choosing CNAPP was cost.

I advise the company to keep evolving and keep it up. Open-source vendors are entering the scene and evolving rapidly, so staying up to speed is essential. 

I rate the solution seven out of ten.

Our main use case for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is protecting our cloud infrastructure from advanced threats while maintaining consistent security policies across hybrid environments; we rely on it most for perimeter defense, traffic inspection, and automated threat prevention.

The advanced threat prevention feature of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security stands out the most to me. The threat prevention feature in Check Point CloudGuard is highly effective because it blocks attacks before they reach cloud workloads, using real-time intelligence and automated controls; one standout scenario for us was stopping a zero-day exploit targeting a misconfigured API, which CloudGuard detected and blocked instantly, preventing lateral movement.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security integrates natively in Azure, allowing security policies to follow workloads as they scale or move, and it also supports infrastructure as code tools like Terraform or CloudFormation for security.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has had a strong positive impact on our organization across several dimensions, especially in security posture, operational efficiency, and cloud agility. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has significantly reduced our organizational risk, particularly in cloud environments, with a measurable drop in misconfiguration, threat exposure, and incident response time, contributing to an estimated 30 or 40% reduction in overall cloud-related risk.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could be improved by enhancing its user interface, simplifying policy management, and expanding third-party integrations. The documentation has a learning curve, which can be dense and sometimes outdated. At first, I needed to learn different documentations, but now it is easier. More interactive guides, real-world examples, and clearer walkthroughs would help new users get up to speed faster.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security for around two years.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is stable.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is scalable.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security's customer support is very good.

Positive

I have saved time due to Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.

The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is very good in Azure for me.

Since implementing Check Point CloudGuard Network Security, my confidence in moving workloads to the cloud has remained the same. I recommend Check Point CloudGuard Network Security because it is better for its security. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Check Point CloudGuard Network Security an eight.

Primary use case is to use it for protecting the network.

I am working with the platform, but unlike a typical customer using it for protection, we are mostly using it for deployment and debugging.

The overall network security is good. It's big-picture, all in one bundle. It's valuable to have everything in one place instead of spreading across different products.  

Unified security management positively affects a company's security operations. They have one unified view of the security. I can connect multiple gateways to the management and have it in one place. I can have reporting and views in a single pane of glass on the consolidated platform. 

It's easy to use. The management is the best on the market. It's very easy to work with, read, understand, and navigate.

It helps increase our customer's security posture. We can see in some cases CloudGuard improves our customers' posture overall. 

It should be more unified across all platforms. There are different kinds of releases for private cloud, public cloud (HA), NSX, and VSX. It is a little bit different on every platform where I install it, and each platform has many limitations like SMB or Maestro. So I need to know that and decide on which platform I should install it on.

I am using the solution for about eight years on a daily basis.

It's mostly stable. There were some stability issues. But most customers have high availability.

Check Point is a leader in firewall scalability. Check Point Maestro is good and Elastic XL looks promising but the code between maintrain and scalable platform should be unified to have a match 1:1 in the terms of commands and limitations. 

Sometimes the customer service is good. Sometimes it is very bad and I have nightmares from it. The worst thing Check Point did was to move the support to India. There are some good people, however, most of the time, the engineers are not very good, just at a basic level. This needs an improvement.

When I am working on a problem and need help, creating a ticket for a particular issue takes about two weeks to get somewhere. I have to describe the issue multiple times, show what the real issue is but lately I have some very difficult issues and I have good engineers assigned to it, so lately my feedback is positive.

Neutral

Cisco ASA and Juniper. My main focus is 95% with Check Point. So I am using only Check Point. I am familiar with other products, however, I am not using them.

It is very easy to deploy. I have the installation with ISO. With ISO, I can install a firewall, the management, or both of them. I can just choose, and it is very easy. The ISO is unified in the new version, R82. I can install a firewall, management, log server, smart event or a combination. This is very efficient.

We dont buy we sell/distribute.

We as a distributor work closely with the licensing. The pricing has some downsides. It could be better and there could be better scalability of the licensing itself. There are just some licenses which are not on the table. Licensing should be more agile and additive.

It was not needed.

Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) has been acting as a perimeter device for our architecture, and it has been helping us to secure and have centralized management and visibility of the cloud network security. As a security analyst, we have been forwarding those logs with the SIEM solutions where we are monitoring network traffic flows for any abnormalities, applications and services, and for potential security breaches.

We have been forwarding those logs over to the SIEM, and we have deployed this firewall in our environment to secure the perimeter by introducing policies. We have utilized the features to have the policies in place for communication with the destinations, to identify the source and destination ports and protocols, and the allowed and blocked connections to the firewalls. These were our basic use cases.

We also use it for network traffic inspections, firewall policy enforcement, application and service controls, and the centralized policy management tool.

Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) has centralized policy management, and the logging and monitoring is the extensive solution that we have really appreciated, as it supports multiple SIEM solutions to have logging and monitoring in place from a security perspective.

The product has native integration support, and all of them are integrated with each other. It has been quite simple for us as we have the entire Check Point suite. It has been quite helpful, and it has been easy to integrate with each other.

We have been utilizing the overall Check Point suites, including the email collaborations, Harmony, and Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security). This includes the Cloud Network Security, AppSec, the WAF firewalls, and Cloud Native Security.

The tool has been quite easy to handle. However, when we were new in this phase, whenever an implementation was going on, there were some areas that we identified with the overall complexity of managing a cloud environment, particularly when we dealt with multiple cloud accounts and networks. Making those workflows more streamlined is an area that can be improved.

The implementation took around three months, as our environment was quite complex.

We are not having any downtime as of now. We have been getting notifications from the team regarding maintenance windows. There has been no downtime observed as of now, and with no glitches or bugs.

As of now, Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) has been scalable. We have been onboarding our environment and deploying the policies. We have not observed any lagginess or slowness on the portal or in the central management.

The tool has been quite scalable. We have been deploying the policies, but we have not observed any issues with the scalability.

Initially, technical support was there to understand our architecture and to deploy them. They have been quite helpful in the initial phases.

The initial setup was quite easy. We have the support team with us to have support, and they have all these SOPs and help documents and the steps on how to perform the tasks. How to perform the onboarding of these firewalls was all in one portal, which was documented with the SOPs. This helped us in a very positive manner.

For new users, we would recommend starting with a clear understanding of the cloud network architecture first: how the traffic flows, how the security policies should be made before major configuration changes, and to start monitoring with logging first and understanding how the policy behaves. These are the primary checks that we would advise new users. Our overall score is eight out of ten.

My main use case for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is network security for my network tunnel.

I have additional examples about my main use cases; it helps us with overall network security.

Check Point Cloud Guard provides a unified security management platform for consistent policy enforcement across all environments. Which makes scalability easy & decreases overall TSO.

The best features Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers include automation of network security and unified security management, which stand out to me because they streamline our operations.

The automation and unified security management have helped me significantly; it saves me eighty percent of the time and reduces errors.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has positively impacted my organization, leading to better productivity. It has increased our productivity.

It increased productivity by allowing my team to spend less time on manual tasks, which helps us to focus on other projects.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security can make deployment and configuration less complex.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security for around one year.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is stable.

The scalability of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is good.

The customer support is good.

I would rate the customer support an eight on a scale of one to ten.

Positive

I did not previously use any other solution like this.

The initial setup with Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is straightforward, with no complications.

I am still calculating the return on investment; it has only been one year, so there are no answers right now.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is satisfactory.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.

My thoughts about the metering and billing experience are that it's fair and okay, though not very clear.

My advice to others looking into using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is to go for it.

I chose that number because of the performance.

I have no additional thoughts about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security before we wrap up.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Check Point CloudGuard Network Security an eight.

This solution would be more beneficial for my AWS side, for our applications. The platform is utilizing AWS, so it requires further protection through some enhancements, which involve allocating more resources into AWS. Check Point serves as our system. I consider it a business case to protect that application work on the cloud.

Check Point is one of the key aspects of our security. It's protecting the e-commerce side and some functions on the public side of the website. It plays a large role in protection.

The types of prevention functions, such as the IPS and other advanced features, provide significant value. 

Check Point is a product that doesn't require a lot of patching throughout the year compared to some competitors. This stability is beneficial for my customer-facing application workload, as it minimizes changes to the infrastructure. 

Maintaining a stable infrastructure that doesn't demand frequent attention is important to me. For our security engineering team in the bank, Check Point is definitely a key aspect. It safeguards our e-commerce side, functions hosted on the public website, our DMZ zones, and the e-commerce hyper-converged infrastructure. 

Overall, it plays a vital role in protecting both our customer-facing and internal company infrastructure.

CloudGuard Network Security provides us with unified security management across hybrid clouds as well as on-premise. We can have a hybrid solution which can be managed easily alongside what we already have on-premises. Rather than than have team layers of management, for example, one cloud separate and one cloud on something else, doesn't make sense. 

The centralization affects our security operations. We are already using a lot of Check Point. What they are already doing has been good for us. However, CloudGuard will add another layer of protection for the things we have in AWS. Any reluctance the organization may have for goign into the cloud, or multiple clouds, will be overcome by solutions like Check point, which is giving us a layer of comfort for our critical workloads.

We're confident in secure cloud deployment and migration. We're already an existing customer and we have a level of comfort with the solution. We know it will give us that extra layer of security and play their role and do what they are supposed to do.  

One aspect that I noticed is that we already have a substantial Check Point setup, so management is a consideration. I'd like to have an ease of management. That's important. I am anticipating the introduction of features like AI or advanced supporting functions on the on-premises side. This would be beneficial by providing insights into capacity and enabling me to project future needs, such as enhancements or additional layers for the Check Point infrastructure. Ease of management and reporting would be crucial for capacity planning and budgeting. If I see capacity increasing, I want to be able to plan appropriately.

I have been using Check Point for many years. However, we began doing some changes in firewalls and handling replacements since last year.

I believe it will perform quite well if it remains similar to what we are already using.

There have not been any scalability issues yet.

I have never had to struggle with customer service. My suppliers are really good partners. They always support us, backed by Check Point. Even if I encounter issues, Check Point's account managers maintain a close relationship with us. Whether through suppliers or direct contact, they are always helpful.

I have used previous solutions, however, I won't mention specific names. Since 80% of us are using Check Point, it doesn't make sense to replace the remaining 20% with something else.

The setup cost is reasonable, and many engineers are familiar with Check Point, making it easy to find someone to do the job. Suppliers and Check Point account managers maintain good relationships with the customers and suppliers.

I use a supplier, one of Check Point's partners, to support us. We utilize two Check Point partners, Indiguity 360 and D2B, to assist us in our Check Point journey and management.

The setup cost is okay. The cost overall is somewhat high compared to other vendors, whether firewalls or cloud-native solutions. Check Point may be on the pricier side, however, in the long run, it proves its value.

We have not done a POC with any other product.

I'm not on the technical side; I'm more on the management side of the product. We do have some rollouts still pending with Check Point. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten since I've never had a negative experience. 

We protect the cloud by uploading environments to the cloud and making the developments over the cloud.

We used to have an on-prem setup, and the implementation of the new one came naturally since it looks like the previous setup. I know the places for making configurations. 

I am only using the basic protection for the cloud, like a regular firewall, and I find it very useful. 

I feel safe deploying Check Point, and the security lets me sleep well at night. It made a major impact since we have to secure the cloud, so all of our projects had to be protected. We never thought about going to the cloud without security.

CloudGuard Network Security provides us with unified security management across hybrid clouds as well as on-premise. If anything looks wrong, I can get the logs from the same place for all the networks. The visibility is great.

It's helped us reduce organizational risk. 

CloudGuard Network Security has had a major impact on our confidence in Security cloud deployments and migrations. We have to secure the cloud. All of our projects have to be protected. That's the the impact. We never thought about going to the cloud without security. 

It should be more agile, as it seems to me that they took their on-prem devices and uploaded them to the cloud. Every time we need a new interface or something like that, we need to make major changes. This is a problem. 

When we try to install a new lab, it appears we need to reinstall the firewall because the interfaces were missing. This took a lot of time, and we had to use the professional service again. I believe this is the point that Check Point should improve.

I have used the solution for almost two years.

The solution is very stable. I can honestly say that I trust it.

On-prem, we are using Maestro, and the scalability is great.

I enjoyed support very much. We are getting premier support. It is amazing. My experience with them was excellent.

Positive

We tried the biggest competitors in Europe. We found that although they are more ready for the cloud, we am more comfortable using CloudGuard. It's easier to use since we come from the Check Point on-prem devices. I understand the menus and configuration. It comes naturally. In comparison, in terms of identifying threats, this solution is more or less the same as others. HOwever, this has more flexibility, We could use the same product and extend it right to the cloud. The deployment was very natural. 

We use Azure and GCP clouds. We used an integrator since we were new to the cloud. We used an integrator. The deployment took one day.

I used Check Point professional integrator. The experience was excellent. The person was very professional. 

The ROI is safety. I feel secure when I deploy Check Point. 

Basically, the pricing is the same compared to competitors. They are all in the same range.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. We've had some problems adding new interfaces in new environments, we do run into issues. For example, when we tried to install a new lab, it appeared that we needed to reinstall the firewall as the interfaces were missing. We had to reinstall, and it took a lot of time, and we had to use the professional integrator again.