Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs ESET Cloud Apps Protection comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (6th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (6th)
ESET Cloud Apps Protection
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
37th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (29th), Patch Management (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.6%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 1.6%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Cloud Apps Protection is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
Bart Coddens - PeerSpot reviewer
Evolved cloud security with active monitoring but needs interface consistency
The user interface needs work. Sometimes, it is a transition from the old tool to the new CNAPP Two that I currently have, and remnants of the old environment can still be detected. I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel. More work is needed in fine-tuning the threat data towards your CSPM and activity logs, aligning them with business intelligence, which requires a cohesive console interface. My assessment of CloudGuard CDRs in intrusion detection and threat hunting capabilities is that it still needs some work. All the threat data that comes in, you need to fine tune it a bit.
LA
Great protection, good privacy, and helpful support
The only thing I would like is a way to open the email that is going to quarantine. Based on the level of security, they cannot open the email to check the message. Even for the administrator, you have to create a security copy to be sent, which will lock the log support. It's not easy for an admin to check and decide if the email is good or not. That is the only thing that I'm seeing could be improved. Basically, ESET doesn't have the ability to let the administrator release an email showing the message on the email. It's not possible. If you want to have an email review, you have to select an option to send a copy. In the way that they designed the system, for security, they are not letting anyone even have the admin privileges to make this happen. Privacy is at a really high level.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"Dome9 has improved our organization; we have a centralized view of all of our assets, our visible assets our ECs, our inventories. And then all the policies are centralized, and it is easier to manage because everything is one component console."
"The user interface is responsive and quite intuitive; when selecting an object it automatically shows the relevant actions."
"The feature that I find most valuable is the blocking feature."
"Good interface and visibility."
"The new scanning function is a valuable feature that wasn't available until recently."
"The audit feature is the most valuable for compliance reasons. It gives you a full view of the whole environment, no matter how many accounts you have in AWS or Azure. You have it all under one umbrella."
"Helps identify and correct misconfigurations in cloud environments, ensuring that infrastructure and applications are secure and optimized."
"The solution has intelligence that integrates with a range of threat intelligence feeds, including Check Point's ThreatCloud, to provide real-time intelligence on emerging threats."
"We are close to having 99% or 98% detection."
"The most valuable features are the precision of detection and the level of customization of the policy."
 

Cons

"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"I'd like to see more advanced encryption for local features, which is not present right now."
"The platform would be significantly enhanced by incorporating data security management capabilities."
"Reporting should have more options."
"For businesses with varied IT ecosystems, increasing the integration capabilities with additional third-party products and services would increase flexibility and user-friendliness."
"The Check Point Infinity admin portal sometimes freezes."
"There are opportunities for improvement that can be addressed through a roadmap."
"I would like them to include support for their products in languages other than English."
"I’d like to see more integration with third-party tools. For example, it would be helpful to have an integration between Dome9 and ServiceNow to manage security incidents and security changes."
"It's not easy for an admin to check and decide if the email is good or not."
"The specific domain file for Apache needs to be well-defined."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"We have the enterprise-level license and we renew it annually because it is worth the cost."
"In the beginning, the price of Dome9 was cheap, whereas now it is not."
"​They support either annual licensing or hourly. At the time of our last negotiation, it was either one or the other, you could not mix or match. I would have liked to mix/match. ​"
"I suggest that you pay attention to the product pricing because while there are no tricks, and the licensing model is transparent, the final numbers may surprise you."
"From a pricing perspective, they are pretty expensive."
"The licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads (number of instances) within one license with no additional nor hidden charges. If you want to have 200 workloads under Dome9, then you need to take out two licenses for that. Also, it does not have any impact on cloud billing, as data is shared using the API call. This is well within the limit of free API calls provided by the cloud provider."
"I would advise taking into account the existing number of devices and add a forecast of the number of devices to be added in the coming year or two, to obtain better pricing."
"The tool's pricing is moderate. Its licensing costs are yearly."
"The solution provides affordable pricing for medium sized industries."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
5%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Media Company
7%
Consumer Goods Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
I find that the pricing for Zafran aligns well with the comprehensive features it offers. The asset and user-based li...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
Zafran is a new startup. Features are continuously being added or improved. 1) Continued integrations with existing (...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
We connect this to our vulnerability scanner as input, our security tools to better determine risk, and our change ma...
What do you like most about ESET Mail Security?
The most valuable features are the precision of detection and the level of customization of the policy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ESET Mail Security?
The solution provides affordable pricing for medium sized industries.
What needs improvement with ESET Mail Security?
The specific domain file for Apache needs to be well-defined.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
ESET Mail Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. ESET Cloud Apps Protection and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.