We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and Cisco Sourcefire SNORT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Wiz, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Vulnerability Management."The dashboard is intuitive. You know if you're compliant or not, and then it gives you a remediation plan."
"The ability to drill down to individual hosts on an account and see which ones are affected is valuable."
"It provides the most useful tools for protecting our financial account records from hackers."
"Dome9 continues to be a major piece of our cloud security architecture and has given our senior leadership team a high degree of confidence in our ability to protect our cloud environment."
"Checkpoint posture management gives you visibility across your entire cloud infrastructure, so it helps you with management, maintenance, and compliance. With visibility across all these cloud platforms, you can protect against compromised credentials or identity theft."
"The new scanning function is a valuable feature that wasn't available until recently."
"We have more visibility than ever before, appreciating the valuable and proactive insight that we receive from the platform."
"It helps us to analyze vulnerabilities way before they get installed in production and the web. It gives us more security in the production environment."
"The solution can be integrated with some network electors like Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco ISE, and Active Directory to provide the client with authentication certificates."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically learn the traffic in our environment, and change the merit recommendations based on that."
"Cisco technical support is unbeatable. It offers a premium service every time."
"It has a huge rate of protection. It's has a low level of positives and a huge rate of threat protection. It's easy to deploy and easy to implement. It has an incredible price rate compared to similar solutions."
"It simplifies the configuration process by offering pre-defined base configurations, including security and connectivity settings."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility that we have across the virtual environment."
"In general, the features are all great. However, if I need to take hardware for ASA, because they need to upgrade to Firepower, we want to create rules. For that, most of the time we go to the command line. Right now Firepower is working really hard on the grid. You can apply all those rules to the grid. Even if you want to monitor the logs, for example, the activity will tell you which particular user has been blocked because of that rule. Firepower's monitoring interface is very good, because you can see each and every piece. ASA also had it, but there you needed to type the command and be under the server to see all that stuff. In Firepower you have the possibility to go directly to the firewall. The way the monitoring is displayed is also very nice. The feature I appreciate most in Firepower is actually the grid. The grid has worked very well."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"The Check Point solution is somewhat expensive."
"When rules change, it messes up the remediation. They haven't found a fix for that yet. The remediation rule goes into limbo. It's an architectural design flaw within their end compliance engine—a serious bug."
"No improvements are needed."
"The Check Point Infinity admin portal sometimes freezes."
"The security of Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management could improve. There are always new security issues coming out."
"It should capture more information in metadata including communication detail. Also, Internal IP addresses should not be tracked as this might be having some compliance issues."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"The guidelines to implement or to link with the clouds are not complete."
"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."
"I did not experience any pain points that required improvement. Maybe a couple of false-positives, but that's about it."
"I don't think this solution is a time-based control system, because one cannot filter traffic based on time."
"With the next release, I would like to see some PBR, so that you can do the configuration with the features."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
"Performance needs improvement."
"The implementation could be a bit easier."
"There are problems setting up VPNs for some regions."
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Vulnerability Management with 63 reviews while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 12th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 18 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "An IPS solution for security and protection but lacks stability". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Qualys VMDR, whereas Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Darktrace.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.
