We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration 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 Harmony Email & Collaboration is notable for its seamless API-based integration, advanced data leak prevention, and comprehensive monitoring system. AWS GuardDuty provides a unified platform for data gathering and advanced threat identification. Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration could enhance its integration with Exchange and other SaaS solutions. Users say AWS GuardDuty could provide a mobile version and improve dashboard analytics.
Service and Support: Some reviewers praised Check Point's technical support, but others were dissatisfied with the response time. AWS GuardDuty receives acclaim for its prompt and efficient customer support, despite occasional concerns about phone service wait times.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration had a straightforward initial setup. Users appreciated the support staff's helpful guidance during complex integrations. AWS GuardDuty is considered easy to set up, but it could become more complex depending on the architecture and integrations.
Pricing: The license of Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is inexpensive and manageable, with a simplified process for renewals and licensing. AWS GuardDuty uses a pay-as-you-go model, and the cost depends on the data usage.
ROI: Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration provides valuable features and support for cloud functionalities, resulting in a solid ROI compared to other options. Estimated user ROI ranges from 15% to 80%. AWS GuardDuty enhances overall security posture, building customer trust and creating potential business opportunities.
Comparison Results: Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is preferred over AWS GuardDuty. Users appreciate its simple setup process, API-based integration, advanced data leak prevention capabilities, user-friendly interface, and comprehensive monitoring. AWS GuardDuty lacks a mobile version, and users want more dashboard analytics.
"It kinda just gives us another layer of security. So it does provide some sort of comfort that we do have something that is monitoring for abnormal behavior."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action."
"It is an absolutely stable solution. Stability-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."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"The product has automated protection powered by AI/ML, which is now far more powerful than before. It uses AI/ML in its detection algorithm, providing fast and quick results."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Its total protection has been the greatest aspect since it completely protects all the mail from the cloud."
"I like the fact that having granular information about the potential threats is received in email."
"The most valuable features would be its ability to intercept phishing emails and emails laden with malware, viruses, false links, etc."
"It seems quite scalable. We don't anticipate any scaling issues. We have it deployed in the cloud."
"The product's environment is easy to work and comprehensive."
"Check Point's technical support is very good."
"Check Point adds value with east-west protection in the data center."
"We are able to protect sensitive business data and maintain regulatory compliance with advanced data leak prevention (DLP)."
"AWS GuardDuty sometimes shows false positives and should have better detection accuracy."
"There is currently no consolidated dashboard for AWS GuardDuty. It would be helpful if they could provide a dashboard based on severity levels (high, medium, low) and offer insights account-wise, especially for users utilizing automation structures."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"Some of the pain points in Amazon GuardDuty was the cost. When compared to some of the other services, depending on how many we had to monitor, if we had a huge range of accounts, as our accounts increased, we had a cost factor that came into play. Sometimes there were issues, for example, with findings that came up, we wanted to add notes and there were issues back then where notes couldn't be entered properly. If we wanted to leave a note such as "Okay, we have assessed this and this is how we feel", or "This is a false positive", Amazon GuardDuty wasn't allowing us to do that. Even with the suppression of certain findings, there was some issue that we had faced at one time. Those were some of the pain points of the solution."
"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."
"For me, I would say just the presentation of findings, like the dashboards and other stuff, could be improved a bit."
"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."
"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."
"We still get some false positives. There are times when legitimate stuff gets flagged and it could be that somebody is expecting a very important email but they don't end up getting it. On the flip side, when we alert Check Point about stuff like this, it is corrected, so they are improving. That's a plus."
"They could improve Check Point support response times. Sometimes it takes days to resolve or even days to get a first response."
"We have used technical support, but their response time is very slow. It needs to be improved."
"Stability has been a pain point. I was going back and forth with my product engineer and project manager for a couple of months. I had the product in a demonstration mode and wasn't satisfied with the results initially. After a few alterations and a few revisions later, it is fine."
"There is too much functionality, which makes it difficult to use. More guidance for users would be helpful."
"From time to time, the system's administrators notice the increase in the false-positive alerts being reported by CloudGuard SaaS."
"The integration with Gsuite could be improved, especially when reporting the amount of emails it manages to filter."
"The next release should focus more on email categorization and provide options for unlocking blocked safe emails."
More Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews while Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is ranked 8th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 47 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.0, while Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is rated 8.8. 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 Harmony Email & Collaboration writes "Has a user-friendly dashboard, a great anti-phishing algorithm, and sandboxing for testing". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP, whereas Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Avanan, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Mimecast Email Security and Cisco Secure Email. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration 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.