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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs GitGuardian Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.7
Organizations experienced significant ROI with Check Point CloudGuard WAF, enhancing security, reducing costs, and improving NIST compliance.
Sentiment score
7.2
GitGuardian Platform saves time and costs by automating security, boosting productivity, and integrating with existing workflows efficiently.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
I can certainly say that we have saved significant time and resources in terms of people and automation.
The majority of our incidents for critical detectors and important secret types are remediated automatically or proactively by developers through GitGuardian's notification system, without security team involvement.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Mixed feedback on CloudGuard WAF support; praised for effectiveness but some users report delays and suggest improvements.
Sentiment score
7.6
GitGuardian Platform's support is highly praised for responsiveness, effectiveness, and friendly service, complementing its intuitive design.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
I would rate their technical support a nine out of ten.
I would rate the technical support as excellent.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.5
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers excellent scalability and flexibility, efficiently handling traffic and supporting multi-cloud environments seamlessly.
Sentiment score
7.9
GitGuardian Platform is efficient, scalable, and adaptable, with quick deployment, flexible models, and responsive issue monitoring for companies.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
They have sufficient resources, and there are no challenges from a scalability perspective.
It handles increasing traffic easily because we can extend our demands based on our needs.
In terms of scalability, I would rate it around a ten out of ten, as it handles all the repositories and commit activity we have.
I would rate it a ten out of ten for scalability.
Currently, what GitGuardian Platform is doing works effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is highly stable and reliable, with minimal downtime and quick issue resolutions, crucial for finance.
Sentiment score
8.3
GitGuardian Platform is praised for reliability, efficiency, and ease of use, with high stability and minimal maintenance required.
It is very stable.
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
We set up a lot of the repository, so GitGuardian is a required check.
The SaaS platform has experienced two significant moments of downtime or instability in the last six months, requiring notices and retrospectives.
I would rate the stability of the GitGuardian Platform as excellent with no downtimes.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF needs cost reduction, improved support, simpler UI, better integration, enhanced protection, and comprehensive reporting.
GitGuardian users desire enhanced customization, integration, usability, automation, and comprehensive features including reporting, analytics, and mobile support.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
It's not something you manipulate, it's not an antivirus where you deal with signatures, updates, and upgrades every day.
I would say that the more automation this product has, the easier it will be to work with it.
Another thing that would be good to see is some more metrics on the usage of the GitGuardian pre-push hooks.
The self-healing activity by developers isn't reflected in the analytics, requiring us to collect this data ourselves.
We are looking for better metrics and audit data, wanting more features such as knowing which users are creating the most secrets or committing the most secrets, what repository, what directory, and who is not checking in secrets.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise buyers find Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing competitive despite initial costs, valuing features, support, and flexible packages.
GitGuardian Platform offers competitive pricing valued for cost-effectiveness and security, especially for small to medium-sized teams.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
It is less costly than Cloudflare, Fortinet, and other vendors.
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.
It's fairly priced, as it performs a lot of analysis and is a valuable tool.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers scalable management, AI-driven security, seamless integration, reduced maintenance, and enhanced compliance with real-time alerts.
GitGuardian Platform excels in detecting secrets with high accuracy, real-time alerts, and broad integration, minimizing false positives.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
One of the best features of the solution is the ability to use pre-push hooks.
A high number of our exposures are remediated by developers before security needs to step in, as the self-healing playbook process engages them automatically.
GitGuardian Platform performs the capability to detect secrets in real time exceptionally, as it activates from the commit and can detect it immediately.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (11th)
GitGuardian Platform
Ranking in Application Security Tools
8th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (4th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Software Supply Chain Security (4th), DevSecOps (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects our web applications and APIs and has a very low false positive rate
CloudGuard WAF is a very straightforward solution. I do not have to worry about signatures. Most of the solutions that are out there are mainly based on signatures, and I have to do a lot of maintenance to get the signature updates, and sometimes, due to a lack of resources, I am not able to do so. With CloudGuard WAF, I have peace of mind, because most of the features are AI-based, and there is not much configuration that needs to be done on my side. Once set, I only go to CloudGuard WAF to check. I do not have to worry about signatures or updates. Everything is done perfectly, and I have a sense of peace because I know our applications are safe. It is very important for us that CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. That is definitely one of the key features I need.
Ney Roman - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates efficient secret management and improves development processes
Regarding the exceptions in GitGuardian Platform, we know that within the platform we have a way to accept a path or a directory from a repository, but it is not that visible at the very beginning. You have to figure out where to search for it, and once you have it, it is really good, but it is not that visible at the beginning. This should be made more exposed. The documentation could be better because it was not that comprehensively documented. When we started working with GitGuardian Platform, it was difficult to find some specific use cases, and we were not aware of that. It might have improved now, but at that time, it was not something we would recommend.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
22%
Government
16%
Media Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudGuard for Application Security?
We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
The pricing can be a bit complex to understand initially. It can be challenging to estimate costs, especially when scaling our usage.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
The pricing can be a bit complex to understand initially. It can be challenging to estimate costs, especially when scaling our usage. Also, while the documentation is comprehensive, it can be diffi...
What do you like most about GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
It's also worth mentioning that GitGuardian is unique because they have a free tier that we've been using for the first twelve months. It provides full functionality for smaller teams. We're a smal...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.
What needs improvement with GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives. We utilize the automated playbooks from GitGuardian Platform, and we are enhancing them. We will pr...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
GitGuardian Internal Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Automox, 66degrees (ex Cloudbakers), Iress, Now:Pensions, Payfit, Orange, BouyguesTelecom, Seequent, Stedi, Talend, Snowflake... 
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. GitGuardian Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.