Check Point NGFW Reviews

We initially started using the Check Point device for the VPN blade.  

After using the VPN blade for several months and using the hardware interface we found it very easy to use.  

The small business hardware device was powerful and easy to set up. We started using the firewall and Nat shortly after that. 

Having additional features like the threat prevention that has IPS antivirus antibot and threat emulation we're all added bonuses. This also gives us a piece of mind for the safety of our business.  

Securing our organization was our main goal. Check Point, with threat prevention which includes IPS antivirus antibot and threat emulation has better secured our business from the internet.  

With the auto-updates made simple and knowledgeable support personnel, it has freed up our time to focus on other IT strategies.  

Utilizing the Check Point support team has allowed us to configure and use other money-saving features like VPN tunneling to remote offices, while still remaining secure in our systems.

Check Point VPN has been most valuable to our organization. Having a hardware solution that allows our remote users to connect securely to our business is extremely valuable. 

The ease of use, setup and configuration backed by the knowledgeable support of Check Point has made this a smooth and easy setup. Our users can get connected securely, anywhere. When connected with our Check Point VPN endpoint, users get the same security and prevention from the threat prevention module as the rest of the devices on our network.

As a small business, IT expenditures are always a tough call and hard sell. With every business connected to the internet these days, firewalls and threat prevention are very important for any business of any size. Check Point's small business devices are a great fit for most any business. However, including some sort of menu or grouping for VOIP would help the small business area that has limited support. Check Point support is very knowledgeable and can also help in this area as they've helped our business evolve as well.

I've been using the solution for 20 years.

The hardware units are solid. It is a stable solution. While you're subscription is active checkpoint fully supports your hardware and will replace if you have any uncorrectable issues.  After 20 years, I've only had to do a hardware replacement once.  Once setup, they just do what their supposed to do.

The solution is very scalable. Configurations can be imported to other units.  Many levels of hardware and software are available.

Customer service has always been very knowledgeable about their products.

Positive

We used to use Norton VPN. We switched due to the fact that we had issues with the system.

The product offers a simple basic setup.

We handled the implementation in-house.

There are different levels of protection and yearly maintenance on offer.

We did not evaluate other options previously. 

The support is great.

Working in an MSP environment, there are more than a hundred firewalls and we use Check Point NGFW firewall which is mainly implemented as perimeter security and internal segmentation firewall. 

Due to our requirements, we implement site-to-site VPN between clients and cloud providers (AWS/Goggle/Azure). The centralized managed infrastructure makes it simple for the IT staff to operate and monitor the firewalls. 

The Smart Console provides a single pane of glass that allows the IT staff to easily manage the environment and troubleshoot issues.

The Smart Console provides a single pane of glass that allows the IT staff to easily manage the environment and troubleshoot issues. 

The UI decreases the hours required to complete a task. It also incorporates compliance and audit control validation into the system. 

IT staff can construct a single policy across all enforcement points in the Infinity architecture. 

There's a unified policy table that combines threat prevention and segmentation policies. 

SmartEvent allows consolidated event management and export.

The Identity-Based Inspection Control gives us the ability to leverage the organization’s Microsoft AD, LDAP, RADIUS, and Cisco pxGrid. 

The Terminal Servers group membership allows policies to automate typical processes (user moves/add/changes) and decrease configuration changes required on the firewall, which is tremendously beneficial. This limits the integration with the identity store to just one interface, and we still get broad security coverage based on a single set of identity policies. 

We leverage the combination of identity and application awareness, which is mandatory in order to build scalable security policies that protect the business without compromising user experience. This feature is extended to the SmartEvent console.

The SmartEvent blade has a huge number of security events/logs. We are trying to find correlation with the help of the SmartEvent blade, however, it may impact the performance of our Check Point management server. It requires additional licenses for Check Point management servers. It should be inbuilt within the management server.

With the increase of volume of traffic, the required resource/hardware to properly run goes up. Therefore, the hardware engineering to architecture flow has to be more efficient.

I've used the solution actively since 2008.

There were moments of where it did struggle when the rules were not properly maintained meaning that rules clean up exercise has to be performed annually to prune out rules no longer being use to allow the firewall to function more efficiently.

Overall, the product handles a production workload like a champ.

Customer service was pleasant.

Positive

Working in an MSP, we have multiple vendors/principals of NGFWs.

You have to work with a sales account manager to get the best price.

You need to work with a vendor that is overall quite knowledgeable. 

The solution should be evaluated and a trial run should be done in the lab as Check Point provides VM instances that can be installed on an open server box. Make sure to check with sales about the features and if they require additional licenses before purchasing.

Working in MSP, we have looked at various NGFWs. Check Point is one of them.

Check Point firewalls are/were deployed in various parts of our network to achieve perimeter defense and internal network segmentation. 

In addition to the firewall functionality, each appliance also leveraged Check Point's IPS blades. The perimeter Check Point appliances were also responsible for terminating any and all site-to-site VPN connections with third parties. 

All traffic from remote locations, remote VPN users, and egress traffic to the internet is filtered through the Check Point equipment at some point in our network.

Check Point has not improved our organization. We have observed a sharp decline in the quality of both products and support. 

Over the last several years, there has not been a single week where we have not had an outstanding issue open with Check Point support's advanced tier teams. 

Initially, we had incredibly impactful issues regarding their scalable platform hardware (which is being discontinued in favor of Maestro) to the point we were forced to rip them out due to them being completely unreliable. 

Check Point support has also seen a significant drop in quality, despite my organization even being a Diamond Support customer with Check Point. We fully believe it would be a wiser investment of time to call Geek Squad rather than Check Point.

The only area that Check Point still seems to excel in is their logging. Reviewing logs on Check Point is a snappy and intuitive process that allows the end-user to filter down traffic to specifically what they're looking for very easily and even with little knowledge of Check Point. 

The ability to create filters on the fly in the GUI with simple clicks to various areas of the log is fantastic and allows one to find exactly what they're looking for with very little effort. Note that this is probably the only thing Check Point still has going for it.

Check Point's support, at all levels, needs a complete overhaul. The Check Point support staff aren't even shy about telling you how understaffed, underpaid, and underappreciated they are. Any engineer with a hint of talent is pulled from general support to higher tiers, and then, once they reach a level of competency above that of your average acorn, they leave for better-paying jobs elsewhere. 

My organization witnessed this first hand fighting through the lower tiers of support and working frequently with the scalable platform team. When we switched to Diamond Support we saw no significant improvement in support save for shorter hold times.

I have personally used Check Point solutions for nearly ten years. My organization has used Check Point for 15+ years.

The solution is absolutely unstable. My organization follows vendor best practices exactly and has every deployment vetted by multiple levels within the vendor. Despite this, Check Point hardware has repeatedly proved unreliable at best, sometimes resulting in total outages for our company. 

My current organization has used Check Point for the relevant past and is only recently completely switching vendors to Palo Alto.

All current Check Point hardware is destined for the recycle bin. There is a pretty low ROI.

Most firewall vendors, Check Point included, make the selection of hardware easy enough based on projected usage. Likewise setup on many vendors in greenfield environments is simple enough and should not require professional services.

I was not involved with the initial deployment of Check Point in our environment as it was before my time. However, each subsequent deployment I have been involved in with Check Point was used based on the existing relationship. Once the issues became too impactful and we realized we had no hope of seeing any improvements we began efforts to rip out the existing Check Point equipment.

Do not let Check Point's past success lure you into their current state of bottom of the barrel.

It is a bit expensive according to the required blades but it is a platform that is worth having as security in a corporate.

I have worked for several years with the Check Point platform (NGFW) and it is by far the most stable in hardware and software.

It is a very friendly platform and easy to configure. It is true that it is a bit expensive (according to the required blades), however, it is a platform that is worth having as security in a corporate environment. 

I've used the solution for more than five years.

Check Point's Next Generation Firewall has definitely improved our organization as we previously used a Linux firewall and we have had to manually configure internet control measures. When it comes to configuring firewall policies it was time-consuming. This has been taken care of by Check Point's Next Generation firewall. Even the integration to the Active Directory has been made to be seamless and requires a minimum effort from our security and network administrators. The technologies that are in place are amazing. For example, the Threat Extraction and Threat Emulation technologies. The Sandbox technology, or Threat Cloud, is world-class.

The remote access blade functionality is really valuable as we now need to just install the client on the user's machines and the client can be preconfigured with the site details. This makes our lives very simple. The logging of the firewall is also phenomenal as it is very granular and very easy to filter. 

The Application control blade is another valuable feature as we now only need to create a rule to be applied and to specify the applicable application which is categorized. The ability to configure dynamic objects, for example, Microsoft Office 365, is also a valuable feature.

The reports are very detailed and the variety is amazing. It caters to everything and is even more that what we had bargained for. They are also customizable, which makes them extremely valuable to us. 

Another great feature is the ability to publish corporate applications in a secure web environment.

Many problems have been solved with these firewalls and we've largely been very satisfied. Thanks to this infrastructure that we have managed, in this pandemic time, to quickly and effectively offer the potential to remotely work for everyone has been good. 

Also important is the separate management interface that has made it possible to carry out even the most operations while comfortably seated at the desk. It provides multiple profiles that you can apply depending on the scenario that presents itself.

It takes a while to install the rules so that if you make a mistake you can only fix it after a few minutes. There's no problem with traffic processing. 

Sometimes you are forced to interact on several levels: on the one hand, you put in the rules, and on the other, you put in the route. The predefined reports are few and it would be nice to increase them since the logs are excellent.

In my work experience, I have been able to use multiple firewall platforms. There are only two valid ones for me and one of them is definitely Check Point. The others charge less but there is a reason for that. It is a good idea to think carefully before rather than after you suffer from a serious attack.

We have been using the solution for three years now.

For me, the solution has been stable. Perhaps running it on a small scale helps.

I like the fact that it's so simple to scale.

I find the support to be very prompt. They go the extra mile to assist and are thorough in their troubleshooting.

I did not use a different solution, however, I came to know about this product while I was working for a company called Syrex.

It was set up for us by a company I used to work for.

It was through a vendor, and they were very good and did it on time as they promised.

A stable and fully functioning solution has enabled us to focus on other aspects of growing the business.

I looked at Fortigate, and it was not as clearly defined, and easy to follow as Check Point is.

Check Point does cost a lot, but for me, it's worth the money I paid.

Some of the products are easier to deploy. For example, the Harmony products are simpler as they have a per user/per device pricing model.

We use Check Point Gateways for securing our data centers including DMZ networks as well as gateways for our branch offices around the world. They are connected via MPLS, internet, or site-to-site VPNs depending on the branch connectivity.

A minimum standard for the whole environment is the NGFW. Firewall rules according to our security policy. VPN for site-to-site tunnels to our own gateways or to partners and customers. IPS is set primarily to prevent, and for some signatures to detect. 

Application Control is still in the early stages.

Firewalling is one of Check Point's core business attributes, and it just works.

Creating site-to-site VPNs between Check Point Gateways that are within the same management is unbelievably easy. If you create VPNs for 3rd parties and there are mismatches or issues, you will see logs that help pinpoint issues or misconfiguration.

Application control help with identifying applications and therefore makes firewall rules easier since changing ports don't have to be adapted every time an application changes or updates.

Generally speaking, all features are well documented and the two platforms help with configuration. Documentation and knowledgebase articles in the user center as well as user recommendation within the forums are great. The Admin Guides are really well documented, but it's a lot to read.

Check Point helps a lot with automatization which definitely reduces the effort to maintain the environment. The best example would be the CDT tool which helps with decreasing the amount of time for upgrading whole environments.

The policy installation length is still too long. It was promised that the time would be severely reduced in newer versions, but it is still too long. R81 promises at least parallel policy installations, which help in larger environments.

Check Point's advantage (to be able to configure everything) is also a disadvantage. The environment is quite complex. Troubleshooting is not always easy as there are a lot of possible debugs that can be taken, and the support will not always send the right or necessary debugs. Some debugs also can cause a heavy load, so you have to keep an eye on what you troubleshoot.

Our company has used Check Point for well over 10 years.

If it's running, it's stable. New setups have to be tested though.

The solution can be scaled from very small branch offices to huge data centers or even cloud data centers.

Support depends on how well you describe the issue and send information. Sometimes escalation is necessary.

The more features (blades) are turned on, the more complex the environment becomes. If something goes wrong, you have to rule out several issues (hardware, blades, et cetera).

As a next-generation firewall, this product is capable of handling all kinds of threats that might try to attack the network, including events such as DDoS attacks. 

The compliance part of the product has been very useful to our organization. There are many useful reports from this firewall device. For example, it can tell us how much of our network has compliance with the guidelines that are in place.

The product is very easy to use.

It's quite a stable solution.

The scalability is very good.

The solution is easy to install and deploy.

The product could always be even more stable and secure, as it would improve protection.

As we aren't using the very latest iteration, it's hard to say which features are lacking, as some might have been added in the latest releases we haven't yet migrated over to.

The pricing could always be more competitive.

Technical support needs to be more helpful.

I've been using the solution for the last six months or so. It's been less than a year, and therefore, it hasn't been that long. 

The stability is good. There are no bugs and glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution offers good scalability. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not hard.

We have 50 users on the solution right now.

I would say that technical support could be better. We also use Cisco, and, in comparison, Cisco's support is way better in terms of how helpful and responsive they are. We aren't as satisfied with Check Point. They need to be faster, friendlier, and much more knowledgeable. 

Right now I am using Check Point and Cisco ASA.

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's pretty straightforward.

The deployment doesn't take long either. It's a fast process.

You only really need two people for deployment and maintenance for most setups.

I handled the implementation myself. I did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant. 

The solution could work to make the pricing a bit lower. It's similar in cost to Palo Alto, however, if it was lower, it would make them more competitive. 

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Check Point. 

We are not using the latest version of the solution, however, I cannot speak to the actual version number. We might be a version or two behind the latest update.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've largely been quite pleased with its capabilities.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

Our primary use case is to secure the perimeter and users in our network.

We use IPS/IDS, deep packet inspection, and VPN.

Our network performance and safety have improved. The reporting also gives us more information about our network, including cost and risk reduction.

This solution helps to keep our network safe and secure, protecting our investment.

The most valuable feature is the powerful, deep packet inspection engine.

The management console and diagnostic tools are powerful and we are happy with them.

The reporting is detailed and helpful.

There should be better integration with our current NAC solution to increase the granularity of policies that we implement.

We have been using the Check Point NGFW for two years.

Overall, this is a very complete tool.