We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and AWS GuardDuty based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management offers solid incident detection and detailed reporting. It also provides control over IAM roles and advanced compliance features. AWS GuardDuty stands out for its data collection, threat detection, and monitoring capabilities. Users say Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management should improve its false positives rate, vulnerability assessments, and integration. They also want greater customizability. AWS GuardDuty could benefit from a mobile version and more dashboard analytics. Users requested better threat intelligence and integration with new AWS services.
Service and Support: Experiences with Check Point customer service have been generally positive. Some users praised its quick response times. However, others found the technical support to be lacking. AWS GuardDuty customers have reported satisfactory and quick responses from the Amazon team.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is fast and uncomplicated, although integrating it with cloud platforms may require additional time. In contrast, the AWS GuardDuty setup is straightforward and effortless, ensuring rapid and effective deployment.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management to be cost-effective, but others found that the license cost was a barrier to scalability. AWS GuardDuty offers a competitive pricing structure based on a pay-as-you-use model, with costs that vary depending on the level of usage.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides comprehensive cloud management solutions, addressing compliance challenges and minimizing administrative workload. Users have experienced a significant return on investment and witnessed substantial growth in ROI. AWS GuardDuty primarily enhances overall security posture, fostering customer trust, and creating potential business prospects.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is preferred over AWS GuardDuty. Users praise CloudGuard Posture Management for its comprehensive data security and protection. It offers complete coverage of users' entire cloud infrastructure. CloudGuar is commended for its granular reporting, rule customization, IAM role, and embedded machine learning for real-time attack prevention. Users said AWS GuardDuty has limitations in analytics, reporting, and monitoring.
"It is a highly scalable solution since it is a service by AWS. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"With anomaly detection, active threat monitoring, and set correlation, GuardDuty alerts me to any unusual user behavior or traffic patterns right away, which is great for staying on top of potential security risks."
"We have over 1,000 employees, and we monitor their activity through AWS GuardDuty."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"It helps us detect brute-force attacks based on machine learning."
"The out-of-band malware detection from the EBS volumes. It's really cool. No agents or anything needed, it automatically finds and correlates based on malware."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"What we found most valuable in Amazon GuardDuty is its threat detection feature, especially because we were monitoring a huge number of AWS accounts, so we needed a solution that would monitor for any kind of malicious activity. The monitoring aspect of the solution was great because it gave us timely notifications if and when anything happened, and Amazon GuardDuty helped keep us on our toes to make sure we took action right away."
"It is able to bring visibility into that cloudy space where the security departments do not really see what is happening on the DevOps side. It brings visibility, security control, and standardization."
"The ability to drill down to individual hosts on an account and see which ones are affected is valuable."
"It offers a range of features tailored to address the unique security challenges."
"The reporting is quite good. It is the most powerful aspect of this solution."
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its reporting capabilities for aggregating vulnerability information and scoring."
"The visibility in our cloud environment is the most valuable feature."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"Its monitoring and alerts are triggered by a failure or non-compliance with policies. It helps us to be able to act effectively and quickly."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
"Because it's a threat detection service, they need to keep up with the various threat factors because new threat factors and attack factors come up all the time."
"One improvement I would suggest for AWS GuardDuty is the ability to assign findings to specific users or groups, facilitating better communication and follow-up actions."
"While sending the alerts to the email, they are not being patched. we have to do the patching and mapping manually. If GuardDuty could include a feature to do this automatically, it will make our job easier. That is something I believe can be improved."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"For me, I would say just the presentation of findings, like the dashboards and other stuff, could be improved a bit."
"I work in a bank, and it would be good if AWS GuardDuty could be integrated with other monitoring and detection tools we use."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
"Scalability, particularly in workload protection, is an area that needs improvement."
"The Check Point solution is somewhat expensive."
"The product must provide different features like antivirus."
"Addressing the large amount of compliance information and benchmarks we need to observe, the tools are becoming our goto dashboards."
"It does not support on-premise deployments such as VMware Tanzu, and this has been a major drawback when it comes to integrations with some applications."
"Adding a feature that allows me to easily identify the changes that have been made to the CIS benchmark and update my own policy accordingly would be a valuable addition to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management."
"We're looking for a solution that can incorporate legacy infrastructure for some of our business needs."
"The entire system is complicated, and the setup process may not cater to the company's demands."
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 19 reviews while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 58 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2, while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Lacework, whereas Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
