Check Point Harmony Endpoint Reviews

We primarily use the solution as an antivirus. We want to protect our systems from malware and viruses.

We are still doing work from home and we are not sure how long this will last. Before Check Point Harmony software, we depended on Windows Defender Antivirus, but we realized that it was not so good. We wanted some good AV so that users who are working on a VPN would have an antivirus installed on their system. 

Also, we wanted a sandbox feature so that, if any machine got infected, we can automatically isolate it from the network.

When starting, we faced many issues. It was due to a partner mistake, however. The partner gave us the wrong setup which caused laptops to crash and it lowered the efficiency. We escalated to our Check Point sales account manager. He immediately set us up with some other partner and tried to resolve the issue. He found the root cause, but still, we needed to format the system. It has been more than 3 months, and now the user's system is working fine. 

We always receive alert emails from Check Point regarding malware or virus status, which is helpful.

We like the sandbox feature. If any machine got infected, it would get automatically isolated from the network. As such, we haven't faced any issues. We like that we have an option to isolate. 

The alert email from Check Point is also very valuable. If any machine didn't get a scan or has a virus due to visiting various websites on a browser, it automatically sends us an email to warn us. Accordingly, we can take action on that particular machine. 

Overall, the antivirus is good.

Technical support could be better. When we register a complaint, we need to register it via the portal only, which is atime consuming.

When we register the complaint, it says there's a minimum of four hours of turnaround time which is high. It should be a minimum of 60 minutes. 

The GUI of Harmony is very slow to upload. I'm not sure if it is due to the internet, but still, at times, we found that when we click on any tab, it takes a minimum of five seconds to get it open.

All other things are okay from our end.

One feature we want to add is an EDR/XDR into this antivirus module.

I've been using the solution for 4 months.

The stability is good.

I found the solution to be okay. I'm not sure how others are providing the support as we haven't checked that.

Technical support is good.

No, we haven't used any other antivirus. It was by default in Windows.

The initial setup was okay.

We implement it through a vendor. 

I would rate their level of service at a 2 out of 5 where 1 is lowest and 5 is best.

If we talk about ROI, then the solution is good, as we are getting a sandbox feature in it plus the VPN licenses if we have the Check Point firewall.

The setup is okay depending on the partner and what the relationship is with you and your partner. The pricing is okay.

Yes, we have evaluated other options. For example, we've evaluated Sophos.

In my organization, we have deployed the Harmony Endpoint Check Point tool with the idea of being able to secure the deployed part of our mobile corporate devices in order to start the security processes at the point as close to the user as possible. 

Using its ease of deployment capacity and its power in detecting malware or insecure elements, this tool provides us with the peace of mind we were looking for in an environment of several thousand terminals deployed on the network in many places and environments.

By using the Check Point Harmony Endpoint tool we have improved our network visibility, have extensive control of our network and our users, and, above all, have a level of security against cyber attacks that we did not have before. 

Now, we are able to detect and avoid security breaks. We can better understand the use that our users make of the devices, and, most importantly, we can apply security policies that keep our users safe as well as the organization's own systems and data. The personal information of our users is also secure.

Right away, we noticed when using Check Point's Harmony Endpoint tool, was the ease of deployment. In our case, it was deployed without too many difficulties, considering the deployment involved several tens of thousands of devices. 

Once deployed, the dashboard and all the inventory information that we had been able to obtain and that we did not know about before proved to be very interesting. 

One of the strengths of Harmony is its power to detect threats and keep us safe. Also the ability to apply policies specifically to users or groups is very useful.

I still don't have a clear opinion of the possible improvements that the tool may need. There are still functionalities that I have not been able to try completely and I would like to spend more time using the tool before offering an opinion to the IT Central community on this point. 

Something that is very important to me is the remediation or recovery capabilities after an attack. From what I have seen so far, this tool maintains the quality line of Check Point products and is always ahead of the needs of the market.

I've used the solution for seven months.

This was the first endpoint tool we use in my organization. We didn't use anything previously.

The only thing I don't like about the solution is the time to pay for the licenses. That said, I really believe that it is a fair price according to the quality of the product offered.

We also looked at Panda Security Adaptive Defense, Cisco Secure Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Security, and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

After analyzing and comparing other solutions, we determine that Harmony has the best value for money.

The solution should be able to provide next-generation security for endpoints and should be able to monitor, detect, mitigate, and block attacks, as well as provide complete visibility in terms of the chain of events so that forensics can be performed accordingly.

All of the security features should be provided on a single agent and it should be lightweight and should not have a performance impact on the endpoint.

Provide required/relevant logs on the console and also should be able to forward to the SIEM solution. So accordingly, a use case can be created. 

The agent should be tamperproof and the admin should not be able to shut down or stop services without the security team concerned, or by using a password.

We should be able to integrate and share IOC with other security devices.

The Check Point SandBlast solution, also known as Harmony Endpoint, is able to detect, block, monitor, and respond to any malicious activity that happens on the endpoint. With a single agent deployed on the endpoint, it's able to provide complete EDPR functionality, with help of multiple security features and modules.

This agent can be pushed either from the Check Point management console or by using other patch management solutions such as SCCM.

It is able to provide a consolidated security posture for all Windows endpoints on a single dashboard and also provide threat hunter visibility for any security threat on the endpoint, and able to mitigate the same. 

Provide capability of reproducing any security threat and also provide RCA/attack tree. 

File/hash can be swiped across the network using the security console, which provides visibility on the endpoint according to its priority.  

Harmony Endpoint provides complete EDPR functionality using multiple modules and features that are available with the solution. These include Compliance, Anti-Malware, Media Encryption, Port Protection, Firewall, Application Control, Full Disk Encryption, Remote access VPN, Capsule DOC, URL Filtering, Anti-Bot, Anti-Ransomware, Behaviour Guard, Forensics, Threat Emulation, and Anit-Exploit. This group of features is able to protect the endpoint from any next-generation attack. Any of the modules can be enabled or disabled based on the organization's requirements.

Harmony Endpoint is able to detect, monitor, block, and mitigate attacks on the endpoint and it builds and maintains relevant logs for later inspection. The agent sends telemetry/metadata to the centralized console for forensic purposes.

Policies for endpoints can be created based on the username or endpoint.

Integration with the Threat intel platform is helpful for blocking any attack at an early stage.

The complete solution can be hosted on-premises or SaaS on the cloud.

Remote access VPN is provided as default in the base license.

A different Policy Server can be configured and hosted at each location so that the agent does not have to reach a central location to receive policy updates. Policy servers are created using an OVF file, which can be installed on any Virtual Platform such as VMware.

It has secure communication between the Policy Server and the Management Console using Certificate/SIC communication.

The agent footprint is small on the endpoint.

It supports integration with other security solutions for sharing threat intel within an organization or over the cloud.

The anti-ransomware module is very strong; it's able to detect any ransomware attack at a very early stage.

Host-based firewall policy configuration is simple, which helps to access an endpoint if the machine is not in the organization's network.

The Threat Hunting module is not available for on-premises deployment.

The user has to connect using the VPN to take Policy Server updates when the solution is hosted on-premises. This adds overhead, as the user has to connect to the corporate network to get the policy.

In the case of a hybrid setup where the Policy and Management Server is on the cloud, the Sandbox appliance has to be on-premises.

Policy configuration and deployment are complex.

The application control and URL filtering features are not very strong.

Application Control databases are generated locally and it does not provide any visibility to the admin on which applications are installed on the endpoint.

The solution is supported only on Windows and MAC and not any other platform.

So far, the solution is stable.

The solution is scalable we can add multiple policy servers based on requirement and it will be integrated with the central management server (Primary/Secondary). 

In the case of the SaaS offering, it is managed by Check Point. 

Technical support is excellent.

We used McAfee AV but it was not able to provide the next-generation capability that we were looking for.

The solution required the Management Console and Policy server for initial setup and it can be increased based on the requirements.

We had assistance from the vendor during deployment and the service is excellent.

There are three different licensing models including basic, advanced, and complete, and it needs to be selected according to the endpoint. For example, it matters whether it is only required for a Windows endpoint as opposed to providing support for BYOD/Mobile devices.

We evaluated Windows ATP and CrowdStrike.

In case you want to set up the solution on-premises and you want to deploy multiple policy servers, it is complicated. You will need an OVF to be deployed at each location and sometimes, organizations don't have the compute or supporting platform for deployment.

Also, for connecting remote users there is a dependency on the VPN, hence it's again a challenge for users to connect to the policy server for updates.

Currently, our servers are not protected by a working anti-virus solution that receives updates. These servers & particularly the business are at extreme risk of not only suffering a breach and losing data, but also have a high risk of infecting the rest of the subsidiaries owned by Tyrion.

The solution hinges on the following requirements:

• The ability to be completely managed from a Cloud environment, including the ability to download new signatures whilst not on the corporate network;

• The ability to generate reports based on set criteria (which can help justify the cost);

• Ability to generate alerts or notifications to an administrator in the event an infection is detected so that Security Incident Response can be initiated;

• Where possible, the tool should have the ability to complement existing tools sets, replace already existing toolsets, or bring something beneficial to the table to help strengthen the security posture;

Implementing a fully functioning anti-virus solution gave the company the ability to defend against almost all threats that occur either on or off the network. It has further given the security team the ability to respond to incidents quicker and perform root cause analysis easier, thus reducing the number of man-hours needed to fix a potential outbreak.

Additionally, it will also give the security team greater reporting capabilities to show the business the types of attacks it faces on a monthly basis. This is through a monthly report & it will help the business tailor security training to its end-users so that they can better defend themselves against these attacks.

The most useful feature so far has been having a functioning and up-to-date anti-malware scanner. This has found multiple dormant threats that have existed within the business that other anti-virus products could not detect.

In addition to this, threat extraction & threat emulation have been a big benefit to give the users more autonomy. For example, allowing them to release their own spam emails that were captured by our spam filter, knowing that the files that are released will be scanned and checked for known viruses.

The only two bug bearers of Check Point SandBlast that I have come across are as follows:

Sometimes, the Cloud Management Portal can become unresponsive or take a long time to process a query. This in turn will cause the browser to freeze, which will require closing and reopening of your browser.

The second is that getting useful "administrator" information requires digging into the policy rules via a second management agent installed on your computer. However, once installed, it is easy to navigate and use so is more of a slight inconvenience than a major issue.

So far, the Check Point SandBlast Agent is in the deployment stage, as we have only had the product for one month.

Stability-wise, we are 90% happy. If the web console could be made more stable, this would go to 100%.

In my opinion, this product is extremely scalable.

We have used multiple different anti-virus products including those by McAfee, AVG, and Kaspersky. This project was to centralize the AV to one single platform.

The initial setup is extremely straightforward. After engaging with Professional services and implementing best practices, we have had only one or two teething issues with the product, which can be easily resolved with a rule change.

Our in-house team implemented the tool with vendor support. Vendor support was extremely knowledgeable of the product and its capabilities

The number of man-hours saved administering multiple AV systems has been the biggest ROI.

Initial monies replacing all AVs with a single product is about £10k.

We looked at Kaspersky, CloudStrike, and VMware Carbon Black.

If you have never used a Check Point product before, I would highly recommend engaging with a Professional Services provider to help with the deployment of the tool & ensuring you implement the tool based on best practices.

Additionally completing the training for the Checkpoint Sandblast tool will equally achieve the same goals.

We are using Check Point Endpoint security to protect our remote users, as well as our roaming users that are accessing our on-premises resources externally.

We have come to know that our remote and roaming users are completely secure with Check Point Endpoint Security. With this confidence, we are now planning to roll out this solution for our on-premises resources, including machines and devices, as well. This will give us complete endpoint security.

Check Point Endpoint Security has improved our organization with features that include Security, Management, and Reporting. We have not yet rolled it out for all users, but that is our intention.

With this product, the data accessible by our endpoints is secure.

We have zero-day protection, which is not available with our other endpoint protection solution. That is the reason we preferred to implement Check Point Endpoint Security.

Finally, from a management perspective, the single point of control makes it more manageable.

The most valuable feature is the Zero-day protection, which covers our on-premises users, and well as those users who are outside of our network. 

With Zero-day protection, we have complied with our customer-specific policies as well.

Most of our users are working on customer-related projects and today, everybody is looking to have zero-day protection at the endpoint level, as well as to protect against unknown threats or viruses.

As of now, product-wise, we haven't found any major concern that needs to improve, although it does not support full MDM and this is something that should be there.

We have been using Check Point Endpoint Security for the last six months.

Scalability is very good and there is no such concern for this solution.

The cost is huge compared to other products that are available on market.

We haven't evaluated other products but we know there are many that are cheaper than Check Point.

In my opinion, it is a very good solution for organizations with a complex environment. We can secure it. From a security perspective, we trust only Check Point endpoint security. This product is a market leader.

With every new firewall that we're purchasing, we're deploying the SandBlast Agent. At the moment we're only running it on about 20 firewalls, just because the licensing isn't retroactive. What we need to do is produce a proof of concept to say, "This is the stuff we're getting." We're looking at it in a learning mode and then we can consider getting into a more aggressive mode of stopping everything. At the moment, we're trying to use it to give us information rather than to fully stop everything.

It's deployed on our physical firewalls, on-prem.

We have seen some attempted ransomware in our network. With the firewall we've already got IPS, but we wanted to integrate the endpoints into that as well. That's something we are seeing. Our IT risk team are getting those reports and seeing them and seeing fewer potential attacks.

It reduces potential downtime through ransomware by reducing risk. I don't think I would go to the CEO and say, "Hey, we've completely eradicated this and that," but it certainly complements other Check Point products that we have. It gives us some more information about what is happening and where it's happening on the network, on-prem, on the applicable firewalls. It's hard to say exactly what it has improved because it just works very well with what we've got. Certainly, with our Windows environment and our VPN, we do see a lot more. But I don't know if there's just more of a focus on the reporting, as a whole, that we're getting.

We have had previous ransomware attacks, and while we can't necessarily quantify any downtime or loss, there certainly was risk around that. This has reduced our risk in that environment. That's one of the big focal points. From a network operational point of view, could you ask, "Well, has it reduced things?" and the answer is "no," but from an IT-risk point of view, our IT risk team have certainly seen less impact from attacks. We're more proactive than reactive, compared to how we were doing things before.

We don't see it leading to a reduced number of security engineers. What we do envisage is information and empowerment. Rather than manually having to check this, that, and the other, we're looking at having these tools available and for them to produce actual results. We definitely see this tool helping us do that.

It's pretty complete for preventing threats to endpoints. Its capabilities are great.

The solution's automated detection and response capabilities are pretty good. It really depends on how aggressive we want to be with it. We've not deployed it in the most aggressive way you can, such as shutting down everything, because we've not deployed it in a greenfield site. It has not been deployed with that in mind. It has been deployed as an add-on service. As such, we don't want to be as aggressive as some top security firms would recommend we should be.

We do like the product, although there are quite a few things that we're asking our Check Point account team to enhance, where we think we probably could get more features from it.

We use a couple of Check Point products, like SmartEvent, and SandBlast Agent is not really integrated into that. We haven't gotten the reports working yet. We are working with the account team and trying. As I said, it's still relatively new in terms of what we're trying to achieve. We probably should have had more Professional Services come and help us. But, from our company's point of view, especially at this time in the market, the finances are just not there. But from what I've seen so far, I don't think there's enough integration into SmartEvent. That's something that I've asked our account team to try to focus on in the next versions or as an enhancement request.

Integration and deployment are probably the weakest points, and maybe service as well, although they are still at the high end. Would we go out to market and buy this on its own? Probably not, is the honest answer. But because it is a Check Point product and the licensing comes as part of it, it gives us this time to go and prove that, when it's together with all the other products that we have from Check Point, it certainly integrates very well. Would I go and buy this just as a standalone service if we didn't have Check Point firewalls? Probably not.

We're relatively new to Check Point SandBlast Agent, once they put it onto their firewall platform with the new environment. It comes built-in for the first year, including the cost. We've sampled it, starting about four months ago.

We had seen it work before. We had demos with it, but it was always something that seemed would be a nice feature to use, but not something the business wanted to buy into, per se. Now that it comes as part of the package for the first year, we thought we'd give it a go and see how it gets on.

I've had no problems from a stability point of view. It just seems to work.

It's definitely scalable. It's whether there is a business appetite. When we get a new firewall, we'll enable it and run it through the service. It's scalable to retrofit. We could do that and we could run that very easily, but that would involve a commercial spend, which at the moment, no one wants to do. We understand that, but the solution is certainly something that is of interest to various people.

If we get approval then it will move from a PoC to across-the-board. At that point, there would be between 100 and 200 people using it and thousands of agents. It could be scaled out to our whole organization. Again, it's funding-dependent.

We have Diamond Support, so it's very good, but we pay for the privilege. We have one engineer and a separate TAC team.

We had a solution but it wasn't really a similar solution. This is the first of its kind for us, for what it does. We do have antiviruses, so that the machines aren't just dead, and we do have our own hybrid package of something that, if you add four of them together, maybe adds up to half of this, but no similar package.

It's relatively easy to set up. There's plenty of documentation out there for how you do it. The way we've done it is probably the easiest way of doing it. We're not going all-out. We've gone with a small approach, mainly due to commercial reasons.

Our implementation strategy is just to switch it on in our new firewalls and see what happens, honestly. That's not always the best approach, but we switch it on in learning mode to give us information on what's out there and to see what we didn't know.

It took us about three weeks with the first two firewalls, and that doesn't include the firewall build time. That's just setting up everything else and the integration piece. There were two of us involved, me and a colleague. There were "dotted lines" into others, such as our IT risk team where we were asking, "Hey, is this what you want to see?" We're not really offering it as a full service, it's a PoC. If it goes live with a view to deploy it to all of our firewalls and all of our endpoints, I wouldn't say we would need any more people. It would be part of our operational team. The same is true for the risk team. I don't think we would need to get more people, although we see the IT risk team having more of an input.

We did it ourselves.  Potentially, if I had an open wallet and a blank cheque book, would we use a third-party? Yes, of course we would, but at the moment that option is just not there.

Return on investment would be not being attacked. Have we seen any? No. Has it identified certain things? Yes. The way we've got to look at return on investment is, all of a sudden we're less vulnerable to attacks. That's a hard measurement to define. Ultimately, not being attacked, and our reputation, is worth a lot more than just a dollar figure.

The cost-effectiveness of SandBlast is knowledge and understanding what is happening on our network. Do we have some infections? Are we seeing certain things which, without this tool, we would be exposed to? Yes, we are seeing that.

Licensing comes free in that first year or is included in the base package. From a commercial point of view, it really just is the renewal cost, rather than a one-time fixed cost or buy-in. That's for new firewalls. For existing firewalls, we haven't even gotten to that point yet. They don't even want us to look at the pricing. First, we need to think about what the product does. Does it do what it says on the tin? And if it does, then it's a commercial thing. We have quite a good commercial model with Check Point, so we don't really need to worry about that too much. The pricing should be good.

The licensing, the way they've changed it, is a positive and a negative. Ultimately, Check Point has changed how it operates and now we have to go back and retrofit.

If this does everything it says it does, I don't see any reason that we would use a different product, because this integrates so well with existing Check Point products.

What we've gained is more of an understanding of what's on our network. If I were to go and do this again from scratch, I probably would have looked to integrate more with our Check Point sales team and would have gotten more help from them.

My advice would be to involve your SE. He can help you through a lot more of the options when you deploy.

We don't use the solution’s Management Platform for the creation of virtual endpoint management services in the cloud. We haven't got to that cloud point yet. It's something we could do, potentially. We're going to work with our account team about that. But that's the one of the lessons learned: We did it by just playing around with it rather than doing a full deployment.

I would rate it at nine out of 10. What comes to mind is its effectiveness. Normally, I don't get involved in the costing too much. Is it doing everything that it said it was going to do? Yes it is, at the moment. Could it be enhanced more? Sure. But we have a relationship with Check Point and they do deliver on the RFEs for us. If we say we want it to do this, they'll get their engineering team looking at that.

Check Point Antivirus has a great design for network, security gateway deployment, threat detection, and prevention.                                              

Check Point Antivirus is a valuable tool for organizations because it helps them secure the network and data.                                                                              

The most valuable features of Check Point are threat cloud integration, sandboxing, and behavioral analysis.

Performance and resource consumption should be reduced. 

Additional features should be EDR, Advanced sandboxing technology, deeper cloud integration, etc.                                                                                         

I have been using it for the past four years.

The stability is good.

Scalability is good.

The support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is excellent.

We did the implementation in-house.

We have seen good ROI.

We also evaluated CrowdStike Falcon and Sophos Intercept X.

We use the solution for endpoint security.

The solution provides endpoint security, ransomware protection, endpoint detection, and response. Also, cloud-based management is a good feature with an excellent catch rate.

If you're using an endpoint that does not have sufficient resources, it would be very tough to use. Most of them will shut down, but it works well with the detection so far. The solution can reduce the impact of the endpoints.

The performance impact should be improved. Also, the tool should have the ability to search for files. It could make on-premise deployment easier. They might have blocked ports and the control makes it more difficult. They can make implementation much easier even with what they have.

I have been using Check Point Harmony Endpoint as a reseller for three to four years.

The solution is stable.

It is a very scalable solution. It is well-suited for medium business. I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

Technical support is responsive.

The tool is easy to set up but the on premise management is difficult. The deployment takes three hours to complete.

I rate the initial setup a seven out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The solution is reasonable, but there are cheaper solutions out there.

Smaller customers go with the cloud, whereas the bigger ones opt for on-premise management.

I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Our company uses Harmony Endpoint for encryption and encapsulation. Our clients use it for data encryption.

The most valuable feature is Harmony Endpoint's encapsulation system which captures the whole system and protects it against other functions. It is really good for the Check Point Harmony specialists.

In terms of improvement, the ticketing system could be better.

I have been using Check Point Harmony Endpoint for about three months. 

In terms of stability, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of the solution a solid eight out of ten. It could be slightly improved. Approximately 1000 people use Harmony Endpoint at our company. The maintenance is done once a week by a team of three engineers.

In the Harmony series, the products are linked to each other. It is a little tricky when you try to open a case and give it to an engineer because, in our custom environment, we have to access it from their devices. For example, in Harmony Mobile, their Android or iPhone devices have to be used. All of that takes time and it would be good if Check Point could find a better solution to this and create a feature to help us collect logs for the cases. I would rate the support a six out of ten.

Neutral

I'm currently working with Cisco Secure Endpoint and Palo Alto Cortex XDR. 

We use both the cloud and on-premise solutions. The initial setup is simple and creating a profile with the agents is easy. We only create agents and direct them to versions of the agents while we integrate them with the process. It only takes about five minutes to deploy one mission.

We have seen good results with the solution. If it is used with Linux or Mac, it provides better performance.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint is a subscription-based solution and the pricing is quite reasonable when compared to other solutions on the market. I would give it a nine out of ten in terms of affordability.

My advice to people who are considering using Check Point Harmony Endpoint is to be careful of which version you choose while deploying the solution. You should get the recommended versions for the agents. Otherwise, there will be a lot of problems and soft ticketing. Overall, I would rate Harmony Endpoint a seven out of ten.

The implementation was really easy. We were able to activate the antivirus blade and install it on the computers we required. In this way, we were able to provide security for malware protection - all represented by Check Point Security Management.

It was required to expand or have the license to use the antivirus security utility. A point that cost us at the beginning was implementing the licenses in the management server however, once up and running, it was easy.

It is an old brand that has all the anti-malware protection, signatures, and revisions to avoid vulnerabilities.

Our organization teams used a Microsoft-based antivirus. However, we already had Check Point gateways in use. We wanted to unify the protection more, and we tried the use of Check Point Antivirus. We really have no complaints. It offers good anti-malware protection and ransomware, among other modern threat protection features. The installation of the equipment was easy, and we achieved the main objective of unifying the protected environment.

We currently use Check Point Management R81, which is one of the most complete versions.

The logs and monitoring are valuable features. It generates enough visibility in terms of what happens on our equipment.

The sandboxing validates some files that have threat qualities. 

We like this security tool.

Check Point is one of the best security brands according to the Gartner quadrant. However, it needs improvement in some areas.

We would like to see better guides in the future with more concrete examples of the best practices.

The support is somewhat complicated. Sometimes they take a long time to solve problems. The language barrier is an issue for Spanish-speaking people. 

Support hours are generally contrary to the hours in Latin America. They could expand the support more and have more trained and effective technical personnel to help customers.

For at least eight months, we have used this solution, which greatly facilitates our security. It is an antivirus implemented through Check Point Gateway R81.

Previously, we used a Microsoft Antivirus. It's not bad. However, we wanted a tool integrated with our Check Point technologies, and therefore, we validated the options to make the required changes.

It is important to assess and verify the costs of Check Point technologies with an expert vendor to help determine the technology and tool that can meet the specific business needs of each company.

The documentation is outdated. However, if it is validated well, it is possible to obtain what is required for the implementations.

At the level of antivirus, we looked at Sophos and McAfee. However, the implementation most adopted in our environment was Check Point. We are convinced that it was the best option.

The product is an easy-to-implement and centralized antivirus solution. I recommend it.