Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Polyspace Code Prover comparison

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Polyspace Code Prover

Download the complete report

Helped 885,444 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Ranking in Application Security Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (8th)

Polyspace Code Prover

Ranking in Application Security Tools

26th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

2.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Check Point CloudGuard WAF	0.5%
Polyspace Code Prover	1.3%
Other	98.2%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

KrishnakumarM

CISO at Pink Solutions

Cloud security has strengthened risk posture and improved advanced threat visibility

There are some API gateway and API securities I mentioned. If these are incorporated with AI-related features, particularly those seven key vulnerabilities I mentioned—token theft and tool poisoning—that would be beneficial. AI-related features are not included yet in Check Point CloudGuard WAF. However, they are present in FortiGate. That is the advantage of FortiGate now. FortiGate is stopping all AI-related vulnerabilities now. FortiGate has this capability. It is unfortunate that even Palo Alto also lacks one or two of these features. Check Point Quantum is very good, without a doubt. However, their capabilities are not in comparison with Palo Alto. There are some features, but there are some gaps in comparison with Palo Alto.

Read full review

reviewer2760282

General Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Has struggled with performance and integration but supports critical safety verification

Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two main driving factors. The CI environments that we use employ up to around 40,000 virtual CPUs per day in peak, running at the same time. We always have problems distributing licenses accordingly with other products. I can talk to the experts doing the integration, but as far as I know, I was involved with Polyspace Code Prover and we had a lot of difficulties integrating it into our Bazel-driven CI toolchain, plus integrating it on the AWS environments in Linux that we use. It was much more straightforward using Code Sonar there. The reason is the execution speed, integration with Azure and stuff, and pricing. The CI integration and maybe a better-suited license model for CI-driven execution are other areas I recommend improving. That's something we discussed with all of the software companies whose products we use, such as compilers. We have a lot of parallel builds, and each call to a license server is actually problematic in the long run.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides great visibility and flexibility to use multiple FQDNs in a single load balancer."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has improved our organization by providing protection against web application attacks such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and bot threats."

"In short, Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a powerful tool."

"The integration with other Microsoft products, especially Visual Studio, is seamless."

"I rate it ten out of ten."

"It provides advanced analytics that gives each team time to prepare for any threat that might occur in the future."

"By using a cloud application security solution, our company can save costs by reducing the need for additional security hardware and software and improving operational efficiency."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."

"The outputs are very reliable."

"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."

"The product detects memory corruptions."

"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."

"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."

Cons

"When I migrate the traffic from our mobile application to CloudGuard, we are not getting what we expected."

"A feature we'd like to see in the future is something that could protect against other attack vectors, with a focus on application protection."

"While Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution, it could be improved in a few areas such as simplifying and customizing the user interface and reporting database."

"The negative side I see is that while most things about Check Point CloudGuard WAF are really good, there is some latency and performance issues, as it can be slow to log in, especially from different regions."

"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."

"For now, the product is doing all that I need, however, I need the support of IPv6."

"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."

"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."

"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."

"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."

"The tool has some stability issues."

"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."

"Automation could be a challenge."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As Infiniti customers, the pricing is manageable, as we have allowances dedicated to each Check Point product. The price is not as high compared to other options I have dealt with in the past."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."

"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

"The sales team or account managers from Check Point are top-notch. As I am using other products as well, my pricing was competitive compared to others."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."

"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"

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"We use the paid version."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

26%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	36
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

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?

Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive. It is a little bit expensive. You cannot avoid this from an Israeli product. Israeli products follow a certain pricing model. If they could reduce the cost ...

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?

What is your primary use case for Polyspace Code Prover?

It is validation for Functional Safety applications in automotive.

What advice do you have for others considering Polyspace Code Prover?

We are actually trying to consolidate everything into one solution. To reduce, that might also be a new solution, but we're not currently actively looking for that. It's just that we'd prefer to fi...

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Comparisons

Compared 14% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 11% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 11% of the time

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 9% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 9% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 18% of the time

SonarQube vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 14% of the time

Klocwork vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 12% of the time

CodeSonar vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 6% of the time

More Polyspace Code Prover Competitors

Product Reports

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Polyspace Code Prover

Download Polyspace Code Prover product report

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec

No data available

Overview

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers advanced security for web applications and APIs with features such as intrusion prevention, bot prevention, and AI-driven threat detection, ensuring organizations achieve high-level protection and efficient security management.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF integrates with APIs, providing a seamless security enhancement while reducing false positives. Its scalability supports rapid deployment, valuable for companies aiming to secure resources in clouds like AWS and Azure. Enhanced threat prevention, comprehensive compliance support, and advanced threat protection methods such as SQL injection and cross-site scripting prevention are key strengths. Despite its robust capabilities, there are opportunities for improvement, such as lower costs, improved third-party tool integration, and a more intuitive interface to enhance usability.

What are the key features of Check Point CloudGuard WAF?

Intrusion Prevention System: Effectively detects and blocks unauthorized access attempts.
Bot Prevention: Shields applications from malicious bot traffic.
AI-driven Threat Detection: Uses advanced algorithms to identify and mitigate threats.
Log Management: Offers extensive logging capabilities for tracking and analysis.
Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across different environments, including multi-cloud.

What benefits should users expect from Check Point CloudGuard WAF?

Security Efficiency: Combines high-grade protection with ease of use to simplify security management.
Cost Efficiency: Aids in effective resource utilization, minimizing overhead.
Compliance Support: Helps meet various industry standards effortlessly.
Enhanced Threat Protection: Provides robust safeguards against common web vulnerabilities.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF is predominantly applied within industries requiring stringent security standards, such as financial services, healthcare, and e-commerce. Its deployment strengthens the defense of critical APIs, facilitates compliance, and supports efficient multi-cloud security management, aligning well with evolving industry demands.

Check Point Software Technologies

Polyspace Code Prover is a sound static analysis tool that proves the absence of overflow, divide-by-zero, out-of-bounds array access, and certain other run-time errors in C and C++ source code. It produces results without requiring program execution, code instrumentation, or test cases. Polyspace Code Prover uses semantic analysis and abstract interpretation based on formal methods to verify software interprocedural, control, and data flow behavior. You can use it on handwritten code, generated code, or a combination of the two. Each operation is color-coded to indicate whether it is free of run-time errors, proven to fail, unreachable, or unproven.

MathWorks

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Polyspace Code Prover