Check Point Harmony Endpoint Reviews

We use it for government utility billing, with all of our systems located in different places, working remotely as well. We also have an on-prem data center here in India. We have Check Point to cover all these things.

We used to have Fortigate, the firewall, and endpoints were only protected by an antivirus. We did not have threat management or ransomware protection. We upgraded to Check Point to get this kind of protection at the endpoint level. It covers firewall, availability, VPN, IP security, IPS, application control, URL filtering, antibot, antivirus, anti-spam, and sandblast threat emulation and extraction.

The entire industry may move to the cloud, where we don't have to worry.

The stability is good.

The scalability is there.

Their technical support is good.

We changed from Fortigate because we deal with public data, government data, utility billing. It is very important to maintain security to the greatest extent possible. We can't afford to lose data.

Our billing cycle that takes place periodically. If we miss something, lose data due to ransomware or the like, we are totally out or operation. We can't again continue the billing cycle in such a situation. It is subject to penalties imposed by the local state government.

The deployment was very simple. It took about 20 days.

We had help from a Check Point solution partner.

Check Point offered very good pricing through negotiation. The licensing is done yearly. We have a three-year subscription, including premium, direct support; the Next Generation and SandBlast are for two years. Our cost, including everything, is 18 lakh rupees.

Symantec is expensive so we did not go for it. Many solutions are equally good, you could go for any of them. Check Point offered competitive pricing and additional features. Symantec may be suitable for certain applications and certain data centers. But what we found over a period of time Check Point suits our purpose.

If you have a medium-size environment like ours, this solution should serve the purpose, although you may need different things. In security, one thing cannot suit everybody.

We have about 500 users of the solution. We don't have any immediate plans to increase our usage. Any increase would be at least two to three years in the future, given the type of environment and workloads that we have. 

We have implemented Check Point for endpoint protection.

We had a ransomware attack and the SandBlast agent automatically picked up the ransomware. It automatically deleted the ransomware and restored the encrypted files.

The most valuable feature of Check Point Endpoint Security is the SandBlast Agent.

One area of this product that has room for improvement is the disc encryption.

I'd like to see a patch management solution like Kaspersky has. That's the only feature that's missing.

Check Point Endpoint Security is very stable.

Check Point Endpoint Security is very scalable. There are 11 of us. You need a central management station with one person. Everybody here is using it already.

The technical support is good. If you log calls, they're very quick to respond.

We used Kaspersky. The Check Point Endpoint was new. We wanted to roll it out to our clients. We wanted to first try it in-house.

The initial setup is straightforward. It was very quick. It was probably, in total, about 40 minutes.

We are Check Point partners. We did it ourselves, in-house.

Our license is on a yearly basis. It just includes the licensing fee.

We did have a look at some other options like Symantec and McAfee. We found that the anti-ransomware component on the Check Point was better than the competitors.

My advice to others that are looking to implement Check Point Endpoint Security is that it's very secure. The only issue is that the disc encryption is bound to the hardware in the machine that it's in. It takes a bit long to decrypt the hard drive. That's the only issue. 

I'd give Check Point Endpoint Security about a nine out of ten.

We primarily use this solution as the main firewall for the perimeter of the hospital. We use the firewall itself for URL filtering, application filtering, and identity awareness.

Before we used this solution, our mail used to have a lot of spam and most of the time our main email account was blacklisted. Now it works well; we are whitelisted by all organizations, including Google. Also, the security of our institution has really improved.

They should provide bandwidth regulation so we can monitor and regulate bandwidth.

It's 100% stable. It has never failed me in all the years I've used it.

I do not think I have had any higher scale than now. Initially, we used the R77.3, but I have just upgraded to the Gaia R80 operating system. For the amount of user we need, it usually works well. We have 5,000 users on it and it is still running okay.

Actually, we have already ordered two more boxes. We are waiting for them to arrive in the hospital. They are both from the 15400 series.

The technical support is fine. We've got a good relationship with the company. If there is any problem, they respond very well and fast.

For maintenance, we have a service agreement with the vendor who brought it to our institution.

We had SonicWall, but it was not stable. With the number of users we needed, SonicWall became a bit overwhelmed.

When we started it the initial setup was very complex. I have never been given any training on Check Point. I had to learn on the job.

The deployment did not take long, the guys who came to the place from Check Point did it very fast, it was a fast thing, within a day or two.

Return on investment was the first thing we checked. We are okay in that regard. We are not complaining.

We pay on an annual basis. There are no additional fees, they mostly tell us what we have to pay. We have budgeted for it.

We looked at firewalls from Fortinet and Barracuda. We even brought guys here to test their solutions, but they were no match for Check Point. We are comfortable now with Check Point.

My advice is to get Check Point, even without trying it first. Use it, and you will be very, very secure. Check Point guarantees the security and stability of your network.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We are an international systems integrator company for Check Point Endpoint Security software solutions.

It's easy to deploy Check Point. If you try to download files or if you try to access any website, Endpoint will secure the activity. The malware will not be permitted to enter from the internet or USB drives. 

The SandBlast agent is the most valuable feature for Check Point Endpoint Security. We've found that the Check Point SandBlast agent is mature.

The remote deployment with Check Point Endpoint Security requires improvement. We have to depend on some of their deployment tools. 

I would like a dependable system endpoint protection management tool or remote deployment tool. The deployment on the remote client needs some type of tool to implement it.

The stability of Check Point Endpoint Security is quite good. One single install is enough. You can forget about it. Then it just takes care of scanning and updates. 

The beauty of Check Point Endpoint Security is the forensics. The forensics are very complicated too and it is easy to understand if some malware has entered into your PC. 

With Check Point forensics, they provide a pictorial diagram in the materials when malware is downloaded, when it is activated, when it is trying to contend with it, and when it is quarantined. 

Across the entire Check Point Endpoint Security software package, the network reports are really good.

For maintenance, one or two employees is more than enough. We have about 30 users total in our company.

The technical support from Check Point is really awesome. They initiate a call once they find a result. From the charts, alerts, and reports, you can reach out to support. 

If you share your phone number, they will call. Check Point provides us with really great support. Unless the issue is resolved, they will not disconnect the phone.

We also used Symantec and some of their anti-malware products. Once we tested Check Point, we realized that it's a lot better. 

The initial setup of Check Point Endpoint Security was very easy. What we found was that they redesigned the entire UI, now called Infinity. Infinity is the new platform they evolved.

The Infinity platform gives us good results and is easy to manage. The entire process is straightforward. The deployment did not take much time, maybe close to three hours.

With Check Point Endpoint Security, you can go with the Suite license or you can go with the individual Blade license. I recommend the Full Suite license.  

Check Point Endpoint Security is not 100% compatible with Kaspersky and Symantec products. You can go only with Endpoint, i.e. you cannot mix with a competitor's solution.

It could be a good solution because they have multiple ways to handle the licensing model. If someone requires an encryption license, it is extra and not included in the base license. If you have any intellectual property, then the financial investment will be worth it. 

If you compare Check Point Endpoint Security to Kaspersky, Kaspersky has two types of suites. One is the Select plan and one is the Advanced plan. If you go with their Advanced plan, then that will collect all of the web confidence reports, many of which vary. 

Check Point Endpoint Security is easier for the administrator compared to Kaspersky, in terms of alerts and reporting. The admin receives regular reports and each report says how many total Windows versions are there, how many Office instances there are, etc.

Each product will have a unique set of advantages and different backgrounds, but when it comes to security, we are happy to go with Check Point Endpoint Security.

We also looked at Kaspersky. 

The anti-malware we found very good on Check Point Endpoint Security. Mainly we observe the overall deployment and then maintenance is easy. It is only one click and you can deploy everything.

Whoever wants their data secure, and they want to have peace of mind, make sure to go with the anti-malware capabilities on the SandBlast Agent. 

We consider Check Point Endpoint Security to be one of the best systems for SAP. 

The zero-day anti-exploit solutions should be there with Check Point Endpoint Security. Because of the budget, people keep the software, but my advice is that it is also a must-have software. You should have SandBlast Agent along with the anti-malware capabilities installed. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use it to help clients solve their security problems.

It helps clients have a better view of the risks. It also helps increase staff productivity by more than 50 percent, in my estimate.

The most valuable features are the innovations that they release in every version. The end-user facilities for managing the tool are also good.

I'm not sure what they are thinking about in terms of additional features at the moment, but I hope that they'll maintain focus on the tool to enhance the solution. 

Areas that have room for improvement are the scope of the product and, while I think the support is good, they can improve support as well.

It has a good level of scalability. They expand the solution with new and helpful features.

Technical support provides good solutions. They are available and respond quickly. They are knowledgeable.

Each scenario is different depending on the client's requirements or the regulations they need to follow or what they need to cover around risks.

The initial setup is easy, but because we are resellers we are trained in setting it up.

In addition to the standard licensing fees, there is a cost for support.

We have more than 70 products related to security solutions and we are resellers of many of them.

Consider the solution as one of your options because it's one of the top tools.

I rate this solution at nine out of ten because it covers what it needs to cover. As always, there is room to improve, but I think it's a good product.

The primary use case is VPN.

It provides remote access for the staff and increases their productivity.

• Certificate management
• VPN

A couple of times, we experienced some sales issues.

The technical support is good.

The initial setup was moderately complex. We had to wait for it to do a few runs, back and forth, until it was solid.

We did the deployment in-house.

We have seen a measurable decrease in the hang times of the detector responses by five percent.

We have it on our endpoints.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of a way it has improved my organization.

The security is its most valuable feature.

Administratively, it's easy to control.

The stability of the solution is good.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We used a consultant, and he was awesome.

We have not yet seen ROI.

The company had this solution. I got put in charge of it, so it was already in place. I decided to keep it.

From the administrative side, it is easy to manipulate and control, and that makes it great.

We were looking to upgrade our protection to our endpoints, giving us more of a forensics backbone into when something happens on a machine. The product can let us know what happened, where it came from, etc. Our primary use case is for more insight into what is happening.

We have a lot of mobile users who work on their laptops from home. Sometimes people travel, they'll go away and connect to hotel or airport WiFis. We had an instance where somebody connected to what they thought was free public WiFi, and it actually infected the machine. SandBlast was able to catch it, stop it, and change the files back. We then got a forensics report to determine what happened with it.

Its ease of use is the most valuable feature. The interface board is also easy to use.

We had existing endpoints, and it was an easy upgrade process.  

There was a learning curve for our general population of employees (the user). 

SandBlast's stability has been great. Once we had it implemented, I have had no problems with it.

We're a small company, so I don't have a lot of scale to discuss about it. We're less than 100 employees. 

I haven't had any problems with tech support for SandBlast. We have a good relationship with our vendor. Whenever we have any questions, they are able to get things answered for us or escalated quickly. There is minimal turnaround, as the tech support has been knowledgeable.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward since it was essentially an upgrade on the technology that we were already trialing. Getting to the next level took minimal effort. 

We did the integration with Tenea, who is a vendor that we have work with for a while now. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. I like product. 

I was not part of the decision-making process. I was just tasked with deploying the solution.