We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and SUSE NeuVector 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 provides robust data security measures, incident detection, and detailed reporting. It offers IAM role control, training features, and governance support. On the other hand, SUSE NeuVector stands out for its user-friendly interface and automation. NeuVector seamlessly integrates with CI/CD pipelines and supports ISO certification checks. Check Point CloudGuard could be more customizable and improve its vulnerability. NeuVector needs improvements in monitoring, reporting, and hybrid environment integration.
Service and Support: Customers generally have positive experiences with Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's customer service, citing quick response times and good support. However, some say technical support needs improvement. In contrast, SUSE NeuVector is praised for its helpful and responsive support, although the process can sometimes be complicated.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is quick and easy, typically taking only a few minutes. On the other hand, the setup for SUSE NeuVector can be more challenging, with varying levels of difficulty reported by users. Some users find it easy, while others find it complex. One specific challenge with NeuVector is integrating it with pipelines.
Pricing: Some users consider Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management affordable, while others say the licensing model is a barrier to scaling and suggest a more flexible licensing model. While some SUSE NeuVector users say the price is low, others believe there is room for improvement.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides effective cloud management, streamlines compliance, and decreases administrative workload, resulting in a notable return on investment. SUSE NeuVector is particularly advantageous for industries with significant risk and exposure, but other sectors like retail might not see the same return.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management over SUSE NeuVector. It is highly regarded for its strong data protection and comprehensive coverage of cloud infrastructure. Users appreciate its intuitive dashboard and powerful reporting capabilities. SUSE NeuVector users say the initial setup is a chore and the solution offers limited support for scanning IaaS and virtual machines.
"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 dashboard is intuitive. You know if you're compliant or not, and then it gives you a remediation plan."
"On Dome9, you can have reports on compliance, users created, and EAM access to the cloud infrastructure. For example, if some machine is exposed to the Internet, importing and exporting to the Internet when it shouldn't, we get immediate alerts if someone does this type of configuration by mistake. Dome9 is very important because AWS doesn't protect us for this. It is the client's responsibility to make sure that we don't export things to the Internet. This solution helps us ensure that we comply with our security measures."
"We like the GSL Builder feature. When you're running a security operations center, you spend a lot of time monitoring endpoint activity to ensure there is no malicious traffic or anonymous access in the environment. The GSL Builder is helpful for deep investigations of a particular reason for an incident. You can use it to get more information."
"The reporting is quite good. It is the most powerful aspect of this solution."
"The rulesets and the findings are valuable. The actual core functionality of it and the efficacy of events are great."
"This solution provides threat prevention and detection of anomalies automatically and investigates the activity of each one of them."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"CloudGuard CNAPP could be enhanced by increasing the number of components that run natively on Azure."
"The license cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"I'd like to see more advanced encryption for local features, which is not present right now."
"Compliance checks on cloud resources against various industry standards and compliance framework templates need to be improved."
"Check Point tools need to improve the latency in the portal since they take a long time to load."
"Almost all features are good, however, they still require improvements to the code security portion on which integration with the major source code repository is required."
"The rules are not well-tuned, and many of them generate false positives or nonsensical results."
"The software configurations theory is complicated, and without proper planning and a well-skilled technical team, it cannot perform its tasks properly."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 60 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 15th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 7 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. 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 SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". 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 SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Falco and Sysdig Secure. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. SUSE NeuVector 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.
