We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Code Security and Snyk based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two DevSecOps solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Having a cloud detection response helps to very quickly identify security threats in our environment."
"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."
"Check Point CloudGuard Spectral helps to improve the code security of our company, generating rapid and complete assessments to be able to make decisions for improvements."
"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."
"The implementation of this tool for security management and control is very simple."
"We have a strong sense of security assurance when utilizing CloudGuard, as it consistently delivers outstanding protection capabilities."
"Its fastest and most outstanding characteristic is ensuring a development line that will not lead to applying applications or code development."
"The most valuable features are their GitLab and JIRA integrations. The GitLab integration lets us pull projects in pretty easily, so that it's pretty minimal for developers to get it set up. Using the JIRA integration, it's also pretty easy to get the information that is generated, as a result of that GitLab integration, back to our teams in a non-intrusive way and in a workflow that we are already using."
"The dependency checks of the libraries are very valuable, but the licensing part is also very important because, with open source components, licensing can be all over the place. Our project is not an open source project, but we do use quite a lot of open source components and we want to make sure that we don't have surprises in there."
"Provides clear information and is easy to follow with good feedback regarding code practices."
"It has an accurate database of vulnerabilities with a low amount of false positives."
"Its reports are nice and provide information about the issue as well as resolution. They also provide a proper fix. If there's an issue, they provide information in detail about how to remediate that issue."
"I find SCA to be valuable. It can read your libraries, your license and bring the best way to resolve your problem in the best scenario."
"There are many valuable features. For example, the way the scanning feature works. The integration is cool because I can integrate it and I don't need to wait until the CACD, I can plug it in to our local ID, and there I can do the scanning. That is the part I like best."
"The solution's vulnerability database, in terms of comprehensiveness and accuracy, is very high-level. As far as I know, it's the best among their competitors."
"The ease of use could be better."
"They could include web functionalities such as sandboxing."
"The costs are not transparent."
"It is generally difficult to find documentation about the product, and there is relatively little to find."
"We need to have many of the baselines or development guides providing less complex writing or development."
"This is a highly technical solution for users who do not have security experience. It requires specialized knowledge of configurations to use it correctly."
"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 enhancements are needed in the logging system and log management processes."
"The tool needs improvement in license compliance. I would like to see the integration of better policy management in the product's future release. When it comes to the organization that I work for, there are a lot of business units since we are a group of companies. Each of these companies has its specific requirements and its own appetite for risk. This should be able to reflect in flexible policies. We need to be able to configure policies that can be adjusted later or overridden by the business unit that is using the product."
"I would like to give further ability to grouping code repositories, in such a way that you could group them by the teams that own them, then produce alerting to those teams. The way that we are seeing it right now, the alerting only goes to a couple of places. I wish we could configure the code to go to different places."
"Generating reports and visibility through reports are definitely things they can do better."
"Scalability has some issues because we have a lot of code and its use is mandatory. Therefore, it can be slow at times, especially because there are a lot of projects and reporting. Some UI improvements could help with this."
"We've also had technical issues with blocking newly introduced vulnerabilities in PRs and that was creating a lot of extra work for developers in trying to close and reopen the PR to get rid of some areas. We ended up having to disable that feature altogether because it wasn't really working for us and it was actually slowing down developer velocity."
"We would like to have upfront knowledge on how easy it should be to just pull in an upgraded dependency, e.g., even introduce full automation for dependencies supposed to have no impact on the business side of things. Therefore, we would like some output when you get the report with the dependencies. We want to get additional information on the expected impact of the business code that is using the dependency with the newer version. This probably won't be easy to add, but it would be helpful."
"It would be helpful if we get a recommendation while doing the scan about the necessary things we need to implement after identifying the vulnerabilities."
"Compatibility with other products would be great."
More Check Point CloudGuard Code Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is ranked 6th in DevSecOps with 11 reviews while Snyk is ranked 1st in DevSecOps with 41 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is rated 8.4, while Snyk is rated 8.2. 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 Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is most compared with Aqua Cloud Security Platform and Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, whereas Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, Veracode and GitHub Advanced Security. See our Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs. Snyk report.
See our list of best DevSecOps vendors.
We monitor all DevSecOps 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.
