Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) Reviews

We primarily use the solution for protecting the network perimeter and monitoring incoming and outgoing packets. Over the years, the product has evolved significantly by inspecting HTTPS and IPS and having antivirus and anti-bot capabilities. It has been interesting to observe how Check Point keeps pace with global security challenges and addresses them efficiently through policies on CloudGuard gateways.

In addition to blocking attacks and protecting the network, we benefit from the visibility into the logs, the simplicity, and the accuracy of reaching the events. All the capabilities are inside the solution. Unlike its competitors, it does not require extra licenses. It is well-integrated and very detailed. We can pinpoint the details to minutes, seconds, or milliseconds, and see what is going on. We can also see smart events and smart reports with pictures, graphs, etc. Through a single pane, we can see how our network environment is behaving. We can see any changes in the attack patterns, the number of logs, or any new events, which may give insights into an attack going on. We can also see if a new application was released by DevOps teams without telling us.

A big benefit of Check Point is that the same policy can be installed on-premises, on the cloud, with Kubernetes, with Dockers, etc. It works on huge devices or gateways on the cloud. It can work with Azure, Google Cloud, and others. The SmartConsole view helps handle all the environments with a single policy which makes it very easy. It enables working with a small team. A small team of five to ten people is enough for a global, worldwide network.

I found the access control policy through SmartConsole, which was formerly SmartDashboard, to be very valuable. It deeply explores source, destination, and port protocols. Competitors struggle to match this simplicity and effectiveness. The evolution of HTTPS inspections, threat prevention, and autonomous threat prevention are commendable. The consistent interface across versions ensures familiarity despite minor tweaks, maintaining a long-standing valid approach.

The visibility provided through logs, charts, and graphs, without requiring extra licensing, is excellent.

I believe that presentations on artificial intelligence indicate that analyzing logs via SmartEvent and SmartLog Security Event Information Management can offer insights into emerging trends and potential next steps. By correlating logs related to BYOD, BYOL, and Shadow IT, it will become easier to manage and hopefully mitigate or understand risks.

I have used Check Point solutions since NGX R65, which was a lot of years ago.

In my experience, recent versions with recommended jumbo hotfixes offer remarkable stability. There have been no unexplained reboots reported by customers.

While working with a customer using 561k gateways, handling 140 gigabits of peak traffic was successful. After that, they changed the product but maintained the same big picture while enhancing throughput and scalability. Adding more devices to security groups is straightforward. The complexity managed by Check Point developers is amazing. Check Point developers in Israel are ninjas. They have built a complete solution with amazing throughput and details. With a few clicks, there is elastic and protected network growth.

Sometimes I find that the VPN teams provide exceptional service, identifying issues promptly. Occasionally, ticket handling delays arise due to repetitive questions despite detailed notes. However, overall, my experience is positive, achieving a more than 75% success rate. Issues are eventually resolved through hotfixes or innovative solutions, supported by a robust knowledge base.

As an integrator and partner, we have the opportunity to see how other products work. SmartConsole itself is an excellent idea, and the management aspect of Check Point products significantly differentiates them. However, my opinion will be biased because I have been working with Check Point products for a long time, but I find Check Point's approach more simple and integrated. We do not need several devices or appliances to do verification at various layers. A simple gateway can deliver everything and secure the network.

On the perimeter of the network, it works as an employee hired to allow or deny based on the policies. It is able to follow the rules. There is simplicity. The capability of SmartDashboard to create rules, receive logs back from the gateway, generate all those insights, and pinpoint the events is amazing.

Compared to open-source solutions, there is more than 95% security. It does not handle only access controls; it has the capability of deep packet inspection to see what is going on and have insights into the intention of the malicious activity.

Its deployment model is a mix-and-match. Sometimes it is better to have it on the cloud because of the elasticity, but sometimes it is better to have it on-premises due to regulations. With the single configuration on SmartConsole, it can deploy policies on the cloud and on-premises. Some customers use Azure, and some use AWS. Having a Check Point solution makes them more comfortable because they know that it is a robust and mature product. It is not something built by a startup six months or one year ago.

I can set it up with my eyes closed, though typing the IP address is necessary. I am very comfortable handling initial client configurations and cabling. Although some view configuration as tedious, the results are satisfying once complete.

I believe that the return on investment largely revolves around network protection. An investment, such as 10,000 euros, aims to prevent costly outages or security breaches, which could be more expensive than the solution itself. Despite views on cost, the value lies in maintaining operational integrity with zero downtime or incidents, facilitating secure, ongoing business operations.

As a partner and solution provider for the last fifteen years, I have distanced myself from specific numbers. However, customer trust in the product is evident due to its comprehensive protective capabilities. Centralized appliances have mitigated previous CPU usage concerns, thanks to multi-threading and processing enhancements. Correct sizing assures minimal CPU usage, even at high traffic levels.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. A ten might impede progress. They might relax and stop the progress. They should keep doing a good job.

I am using most of the CSPM functionality, primarily providing assessments for my customer bases with the CNAPP CSPM functionality. 

I conduct benchmarks and compare the cloud infrastructure with, for example, the CIS benchmarks or other types of benchmarks depending on my customer needs. That's my main use case, to be honest. 

It is not yet the workload protection point. I see that evolving. For now, it is more about CSPM.

It's helped with misconfigurations.

Detecting misconfigurations in the cloud is what the CSPM delivers. I often see that small mistakes and misconfigurations can lead to bigger impacts. That's why I focus on finding those. It saves a lot of time, especially in dynamic environments where we see cloud infrastructure is built up and taken down again, and different parts are deployed in various locations. It delivers fast value, and it's way faster than it would be without it.

We use the Cloud Security Posture Management capabilities. It's perfect for our use cases. Onboarding is very easy. Selecting a benchmark is easy. Defining custom rules is easy, as well, to be honest. This is the part we most rely on.

The Posture management provides rules and checks for security best practices. It's good. That's really the component that is the most valuable for us and our customers and the most easy to implement. It's critical to the business. We provide security services like assessments based on that functionality. That's why our customers come to us. And if this component wouldn't do what it's intended to, then our business would really be affected in a negative way.

The shift left part is not yet at a maturity level I desire. I need more integration from the code-to-cloud principle. It feels somewhat fractured to me. I haven't grasped all the parts yet, and better integration would make CNAPP most valuable.

I have been using it for roughly a year plus. It's been about a year and a half.

From the product itself, CNAPP is pretty stable. Sometimes I might experience that some functionalities aren't described transparently enough for me. It's hard to grasp how it works in the background, and I sometimes need to contact someone to get that information. 

Overall, the product itself is stable. However, if there are errors, it is sometimes challenging to elaborate or troubleshoot since it is not transparent enough to understand what to search for.

Regarding scalability, there is not really a need for scaling up or down. It is good. I never had any performance-related issues. 

We've never had any big integrations with other products within the environment. 

Customer service is very good. When I need help or have open questions, or if I require the capability to deploy a quick test environment, there are always people I can contact at Check Point to get my information or the environment as fast as I need it. I love it. This is basically one of the main reasons why I love working with Check Point products.

Positive

Depending on the cloud environments, I mostly used the native components, such as Defender for Cloud on Azure. I conducted many comparisons, even in some community sessions within my company, and found that Defender for Cloud is not as capable as CloudGuard, especially in multi-cloud environments. It is not as easy to use and has some drawbacks. 

Of course, it is easier to integrate native since it is already there; you just press the button, and it's available. However, the overall solution isn't as mature as the one from Check Point. 

I also paired up with other vendors like Tenable, Palo Alto, and Wiz, and observed that CNAPP is not CNAPP. Depending on where the vendor is coming from, different aspects may be better or more mature than others. It is all somehow speeding up in this very dynamic environment. We always have to redo evaluations and see the current status to keep up.

It's hard to gauge ROI for our specific use case. It's not measurable from our point of view. 

It's not too expensive. However, it is sometimes hard to explain to customers why they should pay this price, and I need to elaborate on that. It is not cheap, of course, yet it is a necessity.

We do not so much use the workload protection capabilities yet. We also do not use the CloudGuard Detection Response.

We're a partner of Check Point. 

Some areas still need development, however it is a very solid solution, definitely. I would rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

There were about ten people involved in the initial project. We conducted some POCs regarding customer security issues we were facing. We outlined ten cases, and these cases were created by a local Check Point engineer in Vilnius, Lithuania, to demonstrate scenarios. After testing all these scenarios, we realized that with certain preconfiguration or suitable configuration of Check Point products, including firewalls, we could effectively address the security cases we had. 

Currently, we have plans to develop more Check Point CloudGuard products, as well as some on-premise ones, and certify engineers. We also plan to demonstrate the value of Check Point products to about five or six customers, along with a local Check Point representative. 

Discussing cloud security and demonstrating its functionality can help build customer trust to initiate POCs and deep dive sessions with architects and others. This business is emerging notably in regions like Scandinavia, where there are more CloudGuard security projects with Check Point. We foresee a similar trend as the market matures and investments increase.

In our market nowadays, a topline risk is phishing. People can just open up malicious email and you can get terrible consequences. We're using Check Point to meet our demands for security, including email security. They have quite good email cloud security in Check Point. We have quite good ratio of getting getting phishing emails caught. Now, there is a lot of hybrid work from everywhere, from home, from the branches, from the main office, from the cafeteria, and so on. We want to manage everything, see how every employee is working, and provide secure working conditions for all the employees.

The products offer low false positives and excellent inspection of phishing emails, alongside monitoring of all internet traffic. These features provide significant value to the customers currently working with us. Combining these features into a single management platform that integrates with third-party vendors would be beneficial, providing a holistic view of all security solutions. This consolidation is essential due to the limited number of IT professionals capable of managing multiple platforms.

The network security has positively affected our confidence in secure cloud deployments and mitigation. When we speak about cloud security and show how it is working, we can get more trust from the customer to start the POC, to do sessions with a customer and architects and so on. Now, we have much more cloud CloudGuard Security and more cloud projects with Check Point. 

This year, I have noticed that Check Point is working on consolidating all aspects into one management platform to provide a comprehensive view. This platform should include Check Point vendors as well as third-party vendors. 

I am unsure what else can be done, however, customers need a holistic view of all security solutions across their platforms, which is critical at this moment due to the limited availability of IT professionals. 

More integration into one solution with increased automation would be beneficial.

Our company has been working with Check Point for three years. Initially, it took about one and a half years to finalize all the negotiations and get approvals from the IT side to start working with Check Point. Then, one year ago, we began a Proof of Concept (POC), which was aimed at IT technical staff and team leads.

There have been a few approaches and POCs, however, I have not observed any downtime. I understand cloud solutions depend on internet bandwidth and other factors, yet I have not noticed any risks due to the excellent bandwidth. I must say, it performs very well, so I have no concerns at the moment.

The understanding depends on identifying the customer's pain points. It often depends on the relationships we have with the customer and the shared information. Once you know the pain points, you know the best way to approach the problem.

Positive

We did not use a different solution. Perhaps my colleagues have tried other solutions, such as Fortinet, but I am not entirely sure. I think Check Point might have been one of the earlier adopters of cloud-related functionalities in our understanding. 

In our market, Check Point speaks more frequently about cloud security compared to Fortinet. We mainly work with two vendors: Fortinet and Check Point. My technical colleagues have been involved in some testing concerning cloud security.

The pricing is sometimes more expensive than some vendors. It's not a matter of pricing, it's a matter of what you get, from the customer's point of view.  

Building close relationships is crucial to understanding the pain points and discussing the best approach with Check Point representatives. This process can take time, making it difficult to rate satisfaction from one to ten.

Check Point is one of the best in the market. I would rate it nine out of ten, as not many well-developed products are available in the market, which is still relatively new. 

Cloud offerings are bringing new ways of working, applications, and security features. It is challenging to keep up with all the changes from cloud providers. For example, Check Point Cloud products are specific, and on-premise solutions offer more stability as updates can be managed internally. In cloud environments, updates are typically automatic, which can lead to downtime or lost connectivity. This issue is inherent to using cloud solutions as opposed to on-premise systems. 

I rate the overall solution nine out of ten.

My primary use case is for the protection of environments that are in the cloud and multiple branches and areas that are in the layout of all the systems.

This solution helped us migrate to cloud environments from environments that were on premises. It helped us implement protection for our systems. The fact that it is part of Check Point's overall protection system within some kind of central management system allows us to easily manage and gain visibility on everything that happens in the organization.

The protection is at a very good level. There's a very high catch rate. It has good flexibility in operating and implementing the system.

Protection is valuable to me because security is the most important aspect. At the end of the day we are looking for what will give us the answer at the best level.

It is easy to implement, and it has a lot of flexibility compared to other systems you have in the organization. In the end, this is a parameter that, in my eyes, is very central.

In the end, it saves time. It's all in one place and you can quickly see how you're doing with the cloud environment. It just makes things easier and helps on a daily basis because it optimizes the understanding of what we have. 

Instead of logging into the system by yourself and starting to check, there's another management system that sees logs. It examines the data daily, and it creates flexibility regarding what we want to investigate. It is much easier for everything to be in the same management and not scattered in all sorts of different places.

Check Point helped me a lot to know that I have a solution that is stable and answers my needs. It really gave me the confidence to move forward with the whole migration to the cloud. It was very helpful.

When I moved to the cloud, I looked at Check Point's solution and as soon as it suited me, I bought it. We chose CheckPoint right away, it was our go-to choice.

From my point of view and my needs, I don't see room for improvement. In my opinion, the more it has support for more environments and the more integration there is with wider areas, not only in Check Point's systems, but also with other systems, then I think it will allow access to more customers which is not specifically my case, but in principle the wider the system, the more it will be able to appeal to a larger audience; integration with other manufacturers in other words.

I have been using CloudGuard Network Security for two years.

The platform is very good in terms of stability. We never encountered any issue with it.

Scalability is very good.

Support is very good. The response time is good and fast, and they are also very professional.

Positive

I had help from a Check Point CS and it all went smoothly. There was only one person from Check Point who was in constant communication with us and provided us service in installing the solution, my experience with him was very good.

After running a test against what alternatives exist in the market and seeing what they offer, this is the solution that fits perfectly into our budget. This is a very important parameter for us, and Check Point CloudGuard Network Security did so.

The price was really good, that's the main reason we chose it. In addition, the licensing model was very simple.

I appreciate the cloud network security. I find it to be very effective, and I am pleased with securing cloud deployments.

I would rate CloudGuard Network Security an eight out of ten. There's always room for improvement. It could become a 10 if they had more accessibility to other platforms. Overall, it is a good product.

I use our Oracle OCI environment to segregate our ERP system, which is JD Edwards, running in Oracle Cloud.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security makes it easy to create firewall routes and so on instead of the tools out of Oracle OCI. It's inside our unified policy.

At the moment, I am only using Network, NAT, and VPN. These are the core components of the system. We aren't using other features. It's activated and yet not customized yet.

It is more straightforward for me to create firewall routes instead of using the traditional board tools in Oracle OCI, which are complex for creating firewall rules. Instead, I use the firewall of Check Point, and it is very easy for me. It is integrated into my unified policy, so I can use it completely as I am used to, making it easy for me to handle.

We can use it across hybrid could as well as on-premises.

It's very easy to create new firewall rules on-premises or in the cloud in the same way, and we can share them thanks to the unified policy.

CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce our organizational risk. It's increased the security compared to the built-in security of Oracle OCI. It has many more capabilities, like IPS and threat prevention, which are available at Check Point. It is based on our security standards. It's reduced risk by maybe 40%.

CloudGuard Network security has increased our confidence in secure cloud deployments and migrations by 50%.

VPN troubleshooting can certainly be improved. It is horrible at this point, honestly. It is horrible compared to other vendors on the market. They have tools where I can directly extract some information on the VPN. In Check Point, it becomes complicated. I need to open a very old-fashioned legacy tool, and operate it by myself, transfer it to my computer, and open the legacy program. This legacy program will not provide detailed insights; it will only indicate if something is working or not, making it challenging to communicate. 

I have been using this product for about half a year.

The solution is very stable.

The scalability is great. It's easy.

Mostly, support is good. It depends. If I have a ticket handled by a first-level supporter who may not have deep knowledge, it could be hard to discuss issues. However, mostly, it is good. Compared to other vendors, it's awesome.

Positive

We're a Check Point customer, and we only use Check Point. 

We are using Oracle OCI for our cloud. The first implementation was a bit hard. We followed the instructions. We had to get the help of support.

We did the setup by ourselves.

I am a long-time customer. I am a technical person, not a commercial person. The technical value is high. The unified policy is comprehensive and helps me to create firewall policies that are shared across all our facilities and plants. This is very helpful for us.

High prices are a concern. It is the highest in the market. However, I like the ease of licensing. It's not that difficult. The licensing is easy to understand.

We had not evaluated other solutions before this product was introduced.

I would rate the product eight out of ten. If it wasn't for the issues with the VPN, I would rate it higher. 

The use depends on the case. I have many customers. Right now, I have one customer, and it's a collection of these functions. The basic ones involve making numerous rules in normal network security. I can protect my emails and files. If someone from my company tries to upload something from the Internet, and I don't know if it’s sensitive, this can help protect my data.

It allows us to make a lot of rules around network security. It helps us protect emails and files. We have the power to protect our data.

There's a whole range of functions that make up prevention against malware and everything. It’s not just one aspect that garners my attention - the whole application is being used to defend. Even as the complexity increases, it is maintained at the same level. And with increasing complexity, I become more efficient, so I have to spend at least the same amount of time.

CloudGuard Network Security provides our customers with unified security management across hybrid clouds as well as on-premise.

In terms of security operations, it helps people spend less time. Integrations make work more efficient.

So far, it's helped our companies to reduce organizational risk by 99%.

We're very confident in the secure cloud deployments and migrations. We feel more safe. It's reliable and it helps avoid mistakes. 

Everything is in one place, and it seems it's easier to use than before. Making it even easier is a good way to improve it more. When it's easier to use, there are fewer mistakes.

I have used the Check Point product for around six years now. 

Stability is okay. I am not aware of any potential stability issues. Check Point is one of the best vendors in this regard.

Performance scalability is good. For my customers, they can add what they want. This is what customers want: the options to get the scalability they need. We simply need to manage the traffic accordingly.

Every experience is different. Every ticket is different, and sometimes it's a little bit painful to pinpoint problems. Sometimes I have a quick solution. Sometimes I am angry, and sometimes I am okay with it.

Neutral

I have worked with Fortinet, however, not with integration into the cloud; it was on-premises solutions. So, I am not sure if I can compare the two, since it's different when it's on the cloud. 

My understanding is the initial setup should be easy. 

The licensing is a bit expensive. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our main use case for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is to provide a service to third-party organizations, as we are the vendor that implements firewall devices. Currently, we have implemented the network Check Point security firewall in many of our clients that is on-premises, but now we are exploring options for clients that are on cloud and we are trying to achieve the same level of security for the clients' machines that are on the cloud.

The main use case would be to use HTTPS inspection as well as a DLP feature that is provided in the Next Generation Firewall so that none of the traffic containing PII or PHI and personal HIPAA traffic does not get over the internet from our customers or from our end.

The best feature that Check Point CloudGuard Network Security provides is CDR, Content Disarm and Re-arm, where it inspects the files and then looks into the file, takes out the malicious code, reconstructs it and sends it to the user. Another valuable feature would be its Zero-phishing capabilities.

I have found the effectiveness of CDR and Zero-phishing features to be great, and we are even seeing it in our environment. We have not yet faced any phishing links in our organization as a result of the zero-phishing features of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has positively impacted our organization by making our cloud platform more secure. Traditional firewalls cannot be relied upon to protect everything, and the firewall ratings for AWS as well as cloud native firewalls are not that high. Having Check Point CloudGuard Network Security in the cloud has helped us secure our cloud platforms.

The only thing that Check Point CloudGuard Network Security lacks is that for VPN, you need to buy a different model. You need to be in the HA sort of things to establish the IPSec between another firewall or maybe another cloud vendor, and that is the only thing that bothers me about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.

We have recently been using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is a stable product.

The pay-as-you-go model is very good for its scalability feature.

Customer support has been awesome, and they respond within fifteen to twenty minutes of opening the ticket. I would rate the customer support a ten out of ten.

Positive

We did not use any other solution prior to Check Point CloudGuard Network Security, as it is the first solution that we are testing.

The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been that the pricing is very competitive because of the bring your own license as well as pay-as-you-go model. We got the best pricing available.

I have seen a return on investment, and we are still in evaluation mode using a trial license. I believe that it will save our time because we can manage everything from a single platform.

We have not used any of the other products competing with Check Point CloudGuard Network Security. We are exploring it, and after this evaluation, we may think of exploring others.

I would rate Check Point CloudGuard Network Security around eight or nine out of ten.

We are currently using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security on public cloud on AWS. AWS is our cloud provider.

We did not purchase Check Point CloudGuard Network Security through the AWS Marketplace. We directly talked to the distributor and have been using a trial license for this.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security provides unified security management across hybrid clouds as well as on-premises, which makes everything easy because you can push policies and see everything across every Check Point Next Generation Firewall across your entire cloud and on-premises in a single management server. This helps tremendously and makes our job much easier to view logs, push policies, and manage everything.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has helped us reduce our organizational risk significantly, and I believe in Check Point strongly because it has only four critical CVEs from 2020 to 2025. We do not have to have a major upgrade every time compared to its competition, which has had more than fifteen to sixteen critical vulnerabilities from 2020 to 2025. This certainly proves that Check Point's secured firewall OS security is better than its competitors and it will provide the best security to its network.

I feel very comfortable using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security because I have been using Check Point on-premises as well. Migrating to Check Point CloudGuard Network Security feels similar to doing the migration on Check Point Next Generation Firewall on-premises.

I utilize Check Point CloudGuard Network Security alongside Check Point Infinity Playbooks to have some automated tailored solutions. For example, if a certain IP address has a request of multiple times, maybe fifteen times per second, then I block that traffic, saying that it is a DDoS. This is what I am testing right now and it is working perfectly.

If you are considering using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and do not want to compromise on security, then Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is the only product you should look for.

I am tasked with deploying firewalls in Azure Cloud, AWS, and VMware. This involves setting up virtual machines in VMware and is essentially focused on these tasks.

It does a great job protecting the clouds.

The important point is that the solution is integrated into our management system (if they already have Check Point). It's just one more gateway to add. We have it on Azure and others. The advantage lies in the integration within our existing ecosystem, which is amazing.

It's good at identifying threats and on par with the market - at least, in comparison to the others we work with. 

We have confidence in secure cloud deployments and integrations. It's important to have confidence. Even if nothing happens, you are protected, You never know when bad luck will happen. There are some public cases that were missing network security on the cloud, and they were affected. It's a must-have, like an insurance policy. 

The license model could be simpler. We have some issues with the license since it tries to be simple, and yet in some cases, it tends to be complex. Apart from that, I do not recall any other issues.

I have been using the solution for roughly four years.

The stability is generally good. Sometimes there are issues we do not understand, especially with older features. Outside of that, the stability is good. It could be better. For instance, when we are working on a release and do an upgrade, we start experiencing unexpected issues. New features might have problems, however, for existing ones, we expect the same level of functionality as before.

We do not use scalability. I do not have much experience with auto scaling, however, it could be beneficial. Usually, our customers use a model that involves bringing their own licenses with static gateways, not scaling out.

Check Point support has its ups and downs. Sometimes, the support is good, and other times, we are a bit desperate. Overall, I would say the customer service is good, not marvellous. There are some challenges.

Positive

As integrators, we also work with other solutions. The main difference is we can take advantage of integrative management. If you already have an environment with Check Point, it's easy and an advantage. 

We typically deploy to the cloud. We create an implementation strategy with our clients. 

Usually, the customer is very savvy and knows what they want. We provide some advice, however, usually, they have their own ideas on what to do and when to do it.

It is important to have this solution because even if nothing happens, you are not protected without it. You never know when bad luck might knock at your door. 

I rate it eight out of ten. 

You need to have some kind of protection in the cloud. Maybe the native protection is enough, maybe it is not. Having protection gives more confidence in the solution. 

The primary use case for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is auto-scaling, which is required for us and serves as one of our primary cases for use.

Features like Threat Extraction and Threat Emulation in Check Point CloudGuard Network Security are the most useful features for us.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has reduced our threat landscape to a great extent and is performing excellently when it comes to finding risks in external email attachments, which is the major benefit for us.

There is nothing where I have come to a roadblock where I think that a particular feature is missing. There is no feature that I think is missing.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard Network Security for the last six years.

Integrating Check Point CloudGuard Network Security with a different solution works fine. Scalability is wonderful, and there are no concerns.

Integrating Check Point CloudGuard Network Security with a different solution works fine. Scalability is wonderful, and there are no concerns.

Technical support by Check Point is good. I can rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security was my first solution of this kind.

The setup was straightforward. The documentation was pretty clear, and as I followed it, the process was simple.

Implementation of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security did not take much time. Implementation was planned for several weeks, but the planning took a bit of time. The actual technical work did not take much time.

I implemented Check Point CloudGuard Network Security myself.

Pricing does not fall under my responsibilities as I am a technical person and do not focus on pricing.

I am not looking for any new solution.

Check Point, being the global leader in providing network security, also provides Check Point appliances. The operating system itself is time-tested, and this time-tested software platform gives us confidence. The firmware, Gaia OS, has given us the confidence to go with Check Point.

We are four people using the product in our organization at the moment.

The product is quite quick, but when it comes to communication, there is some lack of communication regarding escalation and related matters.

I have given this product a review rating of ten out of ten.

Our end customer is using Azure to host a few applications in the cloud, and we utilize CloudGuard Network Security to secure those assets.

CloudGuard Network Security provides unified security management across hybrid-clouds as well as on-prem. Our customer is also using Check Point on-premises, so we have one place to create all of our policies. It is a lot easier than doing it at different places. We have the same policy in different clouds and on-premises. That is a great thing. There is a seamless experience and the same management. That is a great advantage over using Azure's native firewall.

CloudGuard Network Security has helped reduce our organizational risk by about 15%. That is because of the ease of working with one big policy that spans the entire organization.

With CloudGuard Network Security, we get a unified solution. It does not matter if we are on AWS, Azure, or Google Cloud. The migration with Scale Set is nice to work with. It is very easy to upgrade and so on.

Scale Set is highly beneficial. It is easy to upgrade and maintain. 

It is pretty great in all aspects, but the integration could be easier, especially with Scale Set and related features. It was somewhat challenging a few years ago to set it up, but once completed, it worked well. Easier integration with on-premises solutions could be beneficial.

I have used the solution for about three years.

The track record is excellent, with nothing to complain about.

The scalability is great.

Their support is great. We get quick responses. The customer support consists of very talented people. They are nice to work with.

Positive

I have used Azure Firewall. I have not extensively worked on AWS. In Sweden, our focus is primarily on Azure.

We went with CloudGuard because we have been working with Check Point products for quite some time. It is an easy choice. We are already familiar with on-premises network security, so choosing the same in the cloud is a big benefit.

Maintaining the policy is not difficult at all with CloudGuard. In fact, it is easier compared to Azure Firewall, which seems a few years behind Check Point. The solution is effective for utilizing all security features Check Point provides. Although I have not used all CloudGuard features yet, its network security is akin to an on-premises firewall.

We have a CloudGuard in the cloud, and we use normal quantum gateways.

It was not as simple as on-premises, but there were good guides on how to do it, so we managed in the end.

We are the integrator in this case. We managed the implementation for one of the end customers. However, we had support from local Check Point representatives.

The main return on investment has been in the time spent working with the solution. Since everything is unified in both cloud and on-premises environments, troubleshooting is faster.

It has saved about 50% of the time. If we had two solutions, we would have to troubleshoot two solutions.

Handling costs is not my department. Licensing has been quite acceptable. It is a bit easier now, but when I began working with CloudGuard, it was a bit too technical.

My overall product rating is a nine out of ten. A slightly easier setup process would be great. Check Point is performing well. The cloud is evolving rapidly, and Check Point is keeping up efficiently.