We have around 500 firewalls all around the world with a global team to manage them. We are using Check Point NGFW for Internet traffic, IPS, and UTM devices.
Atos provides this solution, including network design and advice.
We have around 500 firewalls all around the world with a global team to manage them. We are using Check Point NGFW for Internet traffic, IPS, and UTM devices.
Atos provides this solution, including network design and advice.
In a VPN setup, we have Internet connection via Check Point. The connectivity is not turnkey like competing devices. We have not yet terminated our site-to-site VPN because things are fluctuating right now and Check Point needs to be upgraded. Also, their troubleshooting needs to be improved for this.
I have been using it for five years.
I haven't seen any stability issues, though I have seen some issues with the management of the gateway. Stability-wise, it is good (a nine out of 10).
We have 74 locations. We can have 10,000 users maximum via an Internet gateway. We have four data center across the world: two in USA, one in London, and one in Dubai. Passing through Check Point per location: in the USA - 5000 users, in London - 2000 users, and in Dubai - 10,000 users.
There are 12 network security engineers/consultants managing Check Point and the legacy firewall, SonicWall.
Right now, we cannot go directly to Check Point because of vendor dependency. We have to first initiate with our vendor.
We migrated SonicWall to Check Point about two years back. That took one year to set up in our organization.
We switched away from SonicWall because it is a legacy firewall at end of life. SonicWall was missing features that Check Point has, like UTM, IDS, IPS, antivirus, etc. Check Point is better for protection and performance-wise.
It is easy to deploy or upgrade. There is no need to do this manually with commands. This solution can be set up online.
We have two devices. Right now, we are deploying and upgrading a new setup, where you can do management, management plus gateway on the device, or virtually you can install your management device on VMware or Hyper-V. With the Hyper-V and the Management Server, you can access all the gateways. For the Management Server and gateways, we have an activation key.
We are an IBM OEM company who received installation support from that vendor. They provided all the network connectivity.
For our implementation, we:
For our strategy, we looked at:
A smaller office of less than 500 people would get a 4000 Series. Whereas, a larger office would get a 5600 or 7000 Series. We have to be focused on the natural topology.
We have had some vulnerabilities when we upgraded the R80.30 Management Server. We have some gateways right now in our R77.30 version, and this means if we go without license in R80.30, then it will prompt a bad connection and terminate. We have had some license difficulties with the connection going from R70 to R80. However, these don't largely impact performance.
We looked at Fortinet and Palo Alto. We did not feel FortiGate was capable of what we required. Palo Alto is somehow not as good as Check Point, budget-wise and performance-wise. Palo Alto is more costly than Check Point.
If you need a good support or something that is good budget-wise, then I recommend going with Check Point compared to Cisco or Palo Alto.
It is a good firewall. It has returned good performance. We are happy with the product. I would rate the product as a nine out of 10.
It assists us in filtering files for our internal users, ensuring that our data remains secure and protected. During the pandemic, it has been invaluable in enabling remote connections through VPN for our employees who are working from home, facilitating our COVID-19 response efforts. We established point-to-point VPN connections with approximately thirty clients, which enhances our security, especially at the outermost layer of our network, safeguarding us from external threats.
It includes features like IPS, which keeps us informed about potential threats attempting to breach our infrastructure, adding a crucial layer of security. It is user-friendly and straightforward to manage, which simplifies our overall network security management.
It could greatly improve our customer experience by centralizing management. Currently, we face the issue of having different management interfaces, which require us to switch between them, causing some difficulties and inefficiencies in our workflow. There are instances where the software crashes and this necessitates frequent upgrades from one version to another.
I have been using it for four years now.
I would rate it as highly stable, giving it a solid nine out of ten.
In terms of scalability, we haven't needed to expand significantly as our current setup consists of firewall checkpoints at the main site and another set at the HQ. These devices can seamlessly communicate with one another. We use SmartConsole managing system, which serves as a centralized hub for collecting and managing logs from all our Check Point Firewalls. As far as I know, the limit for management servers is five firewalls, so beyond that, additional licensing may be required to accommodate more devices.
We don't engage directly with its support team. Instead, we work through a reseller who handles our support needs. When we require assistance, we reach out to the reseller, and if necessary, they will liaise with Check Point on our behalf.
We were previously using Cisco ASA, Cisco X-ray, and FortiGate. However, the technologies we had, particularly the Cisco ASA, were outdated, and there was a clear need to upgrade to a next-generation appliance. When considering our options, we received a proposal from a local vendor in Angola, and after reviewing it, we decided to move forward with Check Point as it is widely recognized as one of the top solutions in the market.
The initial setup is straightforward. I would rate it nine out of ten.
We've had positive experiences with the deployments, and we've recommended it in several instances. Currently, we have implemented four Check Point Firewalls. Our initial deployment at the primary site took approximately a week to set up. After fine-tuning and making necessary adjustments, the total time for implementation was roughly two weeks. The main office at our headquarters had a similar timeline, as the tuning process does require a significant amount of time and effort.
The technology itself is impressive, but I find the pricing a bit on the higher side. This is partly due to the complexities we face with exchange rates in our country, as obtaining foreign currency can be challenging.
Having worked with products from various providers, I've found the experience and functionality of Check Point to be quite impressive and I strongly recommend it, provided they invest in essential training, which is a critical component. Its user-friendly management interface simplifies the process, and it offers a wealth of features. I would rate it nine out of ten.
The primary use case is segmentation in many different areas of the company network. We had a few critical use cases: there was a need for an internal firewall, and also an edge firewall. Apart from having simple segmentation, we had a requirement for additional features like the possibility to decrypt traffic, the possibility to inspect URLs or the intrusion prevention system feature.
A very important thing for us was also to have a very good quality of vendor support. Definitely, this is something we can get here.
With Check Point we have achieved our primary goal - segmentation. We were able to limit North-South and East-West traffic which had a very impressive impact on improving security posture.
We also have the possibility to control Internet traffic, we can use the URL filtering feature together with traffic decryption to be able to allow only safe communication. A very important thing for us is also having the possibility to use identity awareness and be able to implement policy based on user IDs (user ad groups).
I like the Next-Generation Firewall. This is the primary feature and use case for this solution. It's a very important thing for us to have a solution that provides ease of use and an intuitive interface.
We are also using other security blades that are included in the package like URL filtering, identity awareness, IPS, antibot, and threat detection.
The most valuable thing for us is to have the possibility to use all the security blades and all security products and have a consistent policy among different security features. Reporting and integration with external solutions are great.
Check Point could improve the time for delivering requested features from customers. It could be delivered much faster. Also, communication and status reporting for such requests have a lot of room for improvement. After the request, we do not get any information on the status or progress until it is implemented.
Looking at the trend in the market which aims for vendor consolidation, the strategy to deliver one vendor SASE could be beneficial for Check Point and its customers.
I've been familiar with the product since 2003. At my current company, CheckPoint appeared three years ago.
The stability is good.
The range of platforms is huge. It can fit every traffic requirement.
Overall I have had a positive experience with support. Sometimes it takes too long to resolve issues, however.
Positive
I have been using Cisco ASA. The switch was done based on the intuitive management interface and ease of use of Check Point.
The setup is straightforward, even if the policies are big and complex.
We have used help from a third-party company.
I'd advise users to prepare their requirements before choosing the product and model.
I also evaluated Palo Alto.
It is a really good solution. You should be happy with it if you choose it.
At the organizational level, we needed to protect the security of our organization. This is where a much broader need arises. We must protect each of the branches that our company has - in some cases larger than other branches. We took on the task of implementing a next-generation firewall from Check Point which allows us to have valuable equipment that adjusts to the needs of each of the branches according to their size and organizational demand by the number of users. This equipment is designed for infinity architecture.
The designs, including Check Point next-generation firewall equipment, have allowed us to have all branches interconnected with the same brand and the same site-to-site communication service. We can encrypt the traffic through these VPNs and ensure communication in all directions, solving transactions and access to applications and services within our organization and outside of it. Additionally, we have a content filtering robot that ensures that users and applications are reached solely and exclusively by our networks and users.
The most outstanding feature of Check Point is the possibility of having more than 60 indicating services within it. Among the most outstanding in keeping safe is its rule management, VPN configuration, SSL, and, above all, HTTPS Inspection, which is a solution that allows us to see what users do. We can decipher the activity of each connection and see what is inside it. In this way, we ensure that the data is not violated or violated by third parties outside our organization and we validate the internal and timely security.
The Next Generation Firewall (NGFW) Configuration Guides in XL cluster are very complex and other guides should be reviewed to validate configuration references. They should be updated for new versions.
Something worth mentioning is the need for Spanish support and better representation for teams in the Latin American area. There is a growing demand for these IT services and new technologies.
Its guides are identical to the existing ones. It would be more pleasing that these guides be updated and improve their design.
Give it a try, and it will help you more in these times when users are more remote than local.
I've used the solution for two years.
It is quite scalable. That said, it is complex to integrate cluster services from the same equipment.
I was testing WatchGuard and Fortinet. In the end, it was easier for me to integrate Check Point.
The cost is quite high. That said, it must be understood that it is not only a firewall, it is a solution that integrates more solutions within it.
We use Check Point firewalls to prevent attacks against the data center servers by adding more layers of security, such as IPS, Data Leak Prevention. We have also used Check Point to implement security policies in layer 7 and applications as well as to configure the VPN for internal users of the organization.
Check Point's firewall security solution is a complete solution that allows you to prevent attacks against your data center servers and avoid the transmission of viruses to end-users via ransomware, phishing, or forgery of URLs.
Check Point has a centralized console that makes it possible to manage all the deployed equipment. It also has a built-in VPN service that lets users connect through VPN to our organization, which facilitates teleworking while cutting off unauthorized access to the organization's internal network.
The predefined reports are limited and should provide more information. Check Point should provide a greater number of defined reports and produce reports for each division of the organization. Also, historical statistics cannot be obtained from the central console, the data or logs must be exported to another machine and processed from there to obtain this historical information. The number of available physical ports could be increased and Check Point could add support for higher speeds.
We have been using Check Point firewalls for more than 10 years.
Check Point is a company that has been producing firewalls for many years. It is a leader in today's market, and its products are very stable. They are always updating and improving their products to stay at the top of the market.
Check Point NGFW allows easy and fast scalability.
Our experience with Check Point technical support was very positive. They always resolved questions or incidents quickly and professionally.
We have always had Check Point solutions.
The initial configuration was simple. The previous team was also using Check Point, we only had to export and update the rules. Only a couple of things had to be corrected and changed.
It was implemented through a CheckPoint partner who demonstrated great experience in migration.
When implementing, I would suggest you define in a real way what you want to allow —applications, content, destinations, etc. — and drop the rest of the traffic. It is important to review the groups, objects, and networks created to efficiently define the security policies that you finally want to implement.
Before making the last purchase, we evaluated other solutions, such as Palo Alto or Fortinet.
I would rate Check Point NGFW 10 out of 10.
We are a financial institution and we use Check Point as a firewall that is positioned for external connections, like the Internet, leased lines, and site-to-site VPNs for other companies. Check Point protects our mobile applications connected to the internet, as well as the main company website. Some firewalls are positioned on some of our HQs.
We're on version R80.40 (some minor firewalls are on R80.30) and we use 13000, 23000, and 26000 series appliances. We use Application Control, Identity Awareness, IPS, URL Filtering, Anti-bot, Antivirus, Threat extraction, and Threat emulation blades.
I've been in the same company for 11 years, and Check Point has been running in a stable manner for our company's main internet connection (and 7 years before that).
It has protected our main applications successfully without any performance drops, and with its flawless logging capabilities, we were able to pinpoint any issues every time.
The management is also the best among any other firewall, with the convenience to create the objects and rules on the same page. This has helped us save time on operations. We can use APIs to create objects and rules to easily finish some projects.
The best features are the stability and the performance of the firewall and its software blades, simplicity to write the firewall rules on its GUI, and its logging capabilities.
The firewalls are working stably, without any interruptions. As we planned our capacity well, we've never had any performance issues.
The firewall rule writing and object creation are the best and simplest I've seen on a firewall (I've looked at 6 different vendors). I often wonder why the other vendors don't do it Check Point's way.
To see the logs, we can search like a search engine, and we can combine different search strings to pinpoint the interesting traffic.
The product can be improved with fewer hotfixes, and if more generally available jumbo hotfixes were used.
We don't often hit bugs. It's perfectly normal for an NGFW device as other vendors are always fixing bugs too. However, when we hit a bug, the support team recommends some hotfix, and if we upgrade to that, we have to uninstall it before we apply some newer jumbo hotfix. If those fixes were included in a fast manner in the jumbo hotfix (as jumbo hotfixes are tested thoroughly for general availability), it would be ideal.
I've used the solution for 11 years.
We are mainly using it for policy installation and access purposes. We have a bank project where we are using mobile access, Antivirus, and IPS. These are all are configured on the Check Point Firewall, where we are using it on a daily basis.
I have worked on the following firewall series and models:
I have worked on the following versions:
I am currently working on the R80.20 version and the hardware version is from the 23000 series.
We installed this firewall in our organization one year ago, and it is completely fine. There are other deployment also going on for other customers. Most of those deployments are handled by our project teams.
What I like most about Check Point Firewall is that it is easy to use.
The most valuable feature is the IPS. For our bank project, we are using it as an external firewall. All the traffic is going through the Check Point Firewall. Then, using the IPS, we can easily identify if there is any malicious activity or anything else. We also have to update signatures on a regular basis.
We are facing some problems with the management on our Check Point Management Server. There are some issues with R80.20, so Check Point suggested to upgrade. However, we are in lockdown, so we will upgrade after the lockdown. We are coordinating this issue with the Check Point guys. After upgrading, I think these issues will get resolved.
For R80.10 and above, if you want to install a hotfix, then you can't install it through the GUI. I don't know why. In the earlier days, I was able to do the installation of hotfixes through the GUI. Now, Check Point said that you have to install hotfixes through the CLI. If that issue could be resolved, then it would be great because the GUI is more handy than the CLI.
Two and a half years.
They are completely stable. I haven't faced any issue with stability.
There are no issues with scalability.
In Hitachi Systems in Mumbai, there are around 10 to 12 clients who are using Check Point Firewall. There are around 40 network security engineers who support Check Point Firewall in our organization for the Mumbai location, and there are multiple locations.
The technical support is very good. The Check Point guys are very humble and quick. They are always ready to support us if we call them.
I have done four to five initial setups and configurations of firewalls, which have been completely fine and proper. There are no improvements needed.
For one firewall, it will take around two and a half hours to configure the interface and everything else. For the deployment of one firewall, it will take around two and a half hours. If you want to make any clusters, then it is around five to six hours.
We support companies locally and remotely. Since the lockdown, we have been supporting companies only in a remote fashion.
We have to first make a plan of action, then verify that it meets Check Point's requirements. Then, we will raise a case with the Check Point desk. We verify with them if there are any changes that they need us to do. After that, we will go for deployment. Check Point engineering will also help if there are issues with the deployment.
They have made domain improvements to SmartConsole. If you check older versions, such as R77.30, you have to open a separate, smart tracker to view logs. However, in R80.10 and above, you can view logs in SmartConsole. You don't have to open another smart tracker to view logs. That is the improvement Check Point has done which makes it better because it is much easier to find logs. This saves time, approximately 40 to 50 a day in one shift.
For the firewall, there is a limitation on the license. We are facing some problems with mobile access. We have a license for 450 licenses of VPN users. We would like Check Point to have more than that, e.g., if the organization gets bigger and there are more users, then that will be a problem.
I have done licensing and contracts for multiple firewalls. The license and contract configuration is completely fine, but if it is possible to make them cost a bit less, then this would be better.
Palo Alto is a zone-based firewall and Check Point is an interface-based firewall. With Palo Alto, we are using Panorama to install policy, and in Check Point, we are using their Management Server to install policy. The Palo Alto Panorama console has more options than Check Point.
On the Check Point Firewall, you can install policy. With the Palo Alto firewall, you can install policy on multiple gateways. You cannot install policy on multiple gateways with the Check Point Firewall.
If you are making a plan of action for the installation of firewalls, clarify with the Check Point tech engineers that all is proper and good. We always arrange a Check Point standby engineer for this activity, because if anything goes wrong, then they can help on the call.
I would rate this solution as an eight out of 10.
We are using the product in a small office to secure our network to configure the firewall settings to control incoming and outgoing traffic.
This includes setting up rules for allowing or blocking specific types of traffic.
We use intrusion prevention features to detect and prevent potential threats and attacks on your network.
It enables logging and monitoring features to keep track of network activity and identify potential security incidents.
With the solution, we can implement strong user authentication mechanisms to control access to your network resources.
The use of Check Point NGFW makes our business feel safer.
NGFWs typically include advanced threat prevention mechanisms, such as intrusion prevention systems (IPS), antivirus, anti-malware, and threat intelligence. These features help protect your network from a wide range of cyber threats.
NGFWs can integrate with user identity management systems, enabling more granular control over network access based on user identities. This is particularly important for enforcing security policies on a per-user basis.
The interface is user-friendly, and also they give you small training courses on the Coursera website to explain how to use the products.
The dashboard provides a quick overview of the security status, including key metrics, alerts, and recent events. This helps administrators get a snapshot of the network's security posture.
The ability to monitor network traffic and security events in real time is crucial. Check Point's interface often provides real-time visibility into network activity, making it easier to identify potential issues or threats.
Their products are pretty complete, and the explanations are very well done.
Check Point offers training and certification programs for administrators and security professionals. These programs help individuals develop the skills needed to effectively manage and secure networks using Check Point products.
Timely updates to security databases, firmware, and software are crucial for addressing new threats. Check Point's commitment to providing ongoing support ensures that organizations have access to assistance when needed.
We have been using this solution for the last two years already.
The solution we use is pretty complete. For the moment, the stability is good enough for us.
CkeckPoint has solutions for different sizes of companies. Therefore, the solution is scalable. The client has to choose the right solution for their needs. If you call the contact center, they can advise you on your options.
We have not used technical support, up until now we haven't needed them.
Positive
We used a normal antivirus on the endpoints previously. However, after we took a cybersecurity course, we understood that a bigger security solution was needed.
The initial setup is easy. You just click through, next, next, next, and take some steps to make an account and do some basic setups. Everything basically works out of the box.
We implemented the solution through a vendor team; they had well-trained technicians.
To feel safer in the online environment is the most important thing these days. Everything is online now. A solution like that makes it easier and safer for you to work and do things online.
After researching what's available in the market, choose a product. Read reviews and watch demos to assess the user interface and learn what options the product offers.
We searched the market for months before we chose Check Point. There are many security solutions on the market, both for on-premises and on the cloud. We chose Check Point for the ease of use.
The solution is perfect for us. That said, for each client, the needs are different.