We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Code Security and Digital Guardian based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Automation has helped a lot to identify and automatically execute policies, rules, and blocks due to its machine learning."
"The implementation of this tool for security management and control is very simple."
"Its fastest and most outstanding characteristic is ensuring a development line that will not lead to applying applications or code development."
"We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than five minutes in such events."
"Knowing what measures we must take allows us to reduce costs associated with security in the cloud by providing early identification of a risk or a possible security breach."
"The data center security system has provided real-time analytics on performance and data configuration processes."
"Check Point CloudGuard Code Security helps to improve the code security of our company, generating rapid and complete assessments to be able to make decisions for improvements."
"Having a cloud detection response helps to very quickly identify security threats in our environment."
"It has been scalable."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"The ease of use could be better."
"There needs to be better security around API integration."
"I would like this solution to be extended to cellular devices or tablets."
"This is a highly technical solution for users who do not have security experience. It requires specialized knowledge of configurations to use it correctly."
"It is generally difficult to find documentation about the product, and there is relatively little to find."
"I am satisfied with the performance and results enhanced by this product since we deployed it."
"There are a lot of opportunities for how they can use their technology to do more. That would be more like sensitive data discovery and other things besides Git Repos, but then you are expanding the scope of what necessarily their product is."
"The costs are not transparent."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
More Check Point CloudGuard Code Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is ranked 11th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is rated 8.4, while Digital Guardian is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security writes "Good security and functionality with helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is most compared with Snyk, Aqua Cloud Security Platform and Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, whereas Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs. Digital Guardian report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) 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.
