Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs GitGuardian Public Monitoring comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and GitGuardian Public Monitoring based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. GitGuardian Public Monitoring Report (Updated: May 2024).
770,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The app control is very sensitive, and the threat detection and prevention is better than other Check Point solutions. There is a centralized management console for threat protection and self-inspection.""It provides advanced analytics that gives each team time to prepare for any threat that might occur in the future.""Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI.""It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from.""I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable.""Its ability to adapt to our applications and ensure our security policies are followed is a big plus.""It offers good functionality of the application that is currently running.""They offer free trials, which is quite appreciative and grabs more attention from new users and businesses."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Pros →

"The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for.""One thing I really like about it is the fact that we can add search words or specific payloads inside the tool, and GitGuardian will look into GitHub and alert us if any of these words is found in a repository... With this capability in the tool, we have good surveillance over our potential blind spots."

More GitGuardian Public Monitoring Pros →

Cons
"I feel like I need more clarity in understanding pricing for DDoS protection.""There should be automation of threat detection, risk mitigation, and report generation.""Check Point CloudGuard Application Security needs to improve updates on integrations. It also needs to incorporate real-time monitoring features.""They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information.""I have faced issues with the tool's blocking aspects. It is hard to open or block web services due to the multitude of cloud centers. I have to do the process manually at times. We have a bug which is hard to solve.""The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time.""We would like the solution to be more economical since it is not accessible to all clients.""They need improved latency in the main window."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Cons →

"I would like to see improvement in some of the user interface features... When one secret is leaked in multiple files or multiple repositories, it will appear on the dashboard. But when you click on that secret, all the occurrences will appear on the page. It would be better to have one secret per occurrence, directly, so that we don't have to click to get to the list of all the occurrences.""I'm excited about the possibility of Public Postman scanning being integrated with GitGuardian in the future. Additionally, I'm interested in exploring the potential use of honeytokens, which seems like a compelling approach to lure and identify attackers."

More GitGuardian Public Monitoring Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
  • "The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
  • "Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
  • "Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
  • "It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
  • "I find the pricing to be reasonable."
  • "If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale"
  • "Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
  • More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It's a bit expensive, but it works well. You get what you pay for."
  • More GitGuardian Public Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    770,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:This is where I have a different opinion. If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because… more »
    Top Answer:In terms of features, I do not have any negatives. Their integration is extremely quick. It is better than others I have been involved with in the past. Their pricing model, however, can be better.
    Top Answer:The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for.
    Top Answer:It's a bit expensive, but it works well. You get what you pay for. You get something that is fully managed with a lot of features, and a tool that is very efficient.
    Top Answer:I'm excited about the possibility of Public Postman scanning being integrated with GitGuardian in the future. Additionally, I'm interested in exploring the potential use of honeytokens, which seems… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    442
    Comparisons
    128
    Reviews
    26
    Average Words per Review
    608
    Rating
    8.9
    Views
    237
    Comparisons
    97
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    1,292
    Rating
    9.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
    Learn More
    GitGuardian
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Check Point CloudGuard Web Application Firewall (WAF) is a cloud-based security solution engineered to safeguard web applications and APIs against diverse cyber threats. Offering protection against sophisticated attacks, it identifies vulnerabilities listed in the OWASP Top 10 and blocks new threats. Utilizing contextual AI, the system reduces false positives, allowing security professionals to focus on genuine threats. With a zero-configuration setup, it automatically adapts to application changes, ensuring minimal configuration requirements. Promising swift deployments in as little as 48 hours and robust API security, CloudGuard WAF aims to streamline application security management while delivering comprehensive protection.

    GitGuardian Public Monitoring allows real-time GitHub scanning and alerting to uncover sensitive company information hiding in online repositories. It monitors both organization repositories and developers' personal repositories. The solution gives visibility to developers and security teams on this very critical blindspot that are the organization developers' personal repositories on GitHub (80% of leaked corporate secrets on public GitHub come from developers’ personal repositories).

    GitGuardian Public Monitoring is particularly interesting for companies with large development teams (above 200 developers) and modern development practices.

    GitGuardian Public Monitoring cover 350+ API providers, database connection strings, private keys, certificates, usernames and passwords and intellectual property. It uses sophisticated pattern matching techniques to detect credentials that cannot be strictly defined with a distinctive pattern (like unprefixed credentials). The algorithm has a high precision (91% “true positive” feedback following our alerts, as reported by our users.)

    The alerting is done in real-time (a few seconds after the secret was publicly exposed) which allows fast remediation involving in a collaborative way developers, security teams and operations.

    GitGuardian Public Monitoring also allows red teams and pentesters to proactively look for sensitive information by performing complex queries on 12 billion documents and metadata from more than 3 years of GitHub history.

    GitGuardian Public Monitoring scans public GitHub activity in real-time, helping organizations detect sensitive information leaks in source code repositories. Our solution gives Threat Intelligence and Security teams full visibility over their organization’s public GitHub Attack Surface, by monitoring both organization-owned repositories and developers' personal repositories.

    With 80% of secrets and credentials leaks on public GitHub finding their source in developers' personal repositories, GitGuardian for Public Monitoring helps organizations address a critical security blind spot.

    With real-time incident notification, Threat Intelligence and Security teams are guaranteed to reach the incident scene before everyone else and take action to mitigate the threat of breaches and intrusions.

    Sample Customers
    Information Not Available
    Align Technology, Automox, Fred Hutch, Instacart, Maven Wave, Mirantis, SafetyCulture, Snowflake, Talend
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Security Firm19%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Cloud Solution Provider10%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Security Firm32%
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    Healthcare Company7%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business61%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise21%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business38%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise49%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. GitGuardian Public Monitoring
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. GitGuardian Public Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    770,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 11th in Application Security Tools with 30 reviews while GitGuardian Public Monitoring is ranked 27th in Application Security Tools with 2 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 9.0, while GitGuardian Public Monitoring is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitGuardian Public Monitoring writes "Helps us prioritize remediation tasks efficiently, improves our overall security visibility, and is effective in detecting and alerting us to security leaks quickly". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with SonarQube and Checkmarx One, whereas GitGuardian Public Monitoring is most compared with Snyk. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. GitGuardian Public Monitoring report.

    See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.