We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration and Microsoft Defender for Cloud based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration outperforms Microsoft Defender for Cloud among our reviewers. Check Point Harmony seamlessly integrates with different platforms and services, offers advanced data leak prevention features, and provides comprehensive monitoring. Microsoft Defender for Cloud received mixed reviews for its customer service, support, setup process, and licensing experience.
"Its analysis or emulation in the review of each file using the cloud and Check Point helps make each interaction via email more secure."
"For Threat Prevention, I was impressed with this feature and the solution's effectiveness. It has been very good."
"Its characteristics are adapted to the most modern threats."
"I can count the number of endpoints, emails, and collaborations being used in the environment."
"Email security has improved since we deployed this platform."
"The dashboard provides information to investigate more about malicious activity and blocked emails."
"The automated rule cleanups and automated policy installs have improved my customers' organizations."
"The solution has a very effective anti-phishing algorithm that detects a significantly higher number of phishing emails compared to the default Microsoft solution."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive. It's very intuitive."
"Microsoft Defender has a lot of features including regulatory compliance and attaching workbooks but the most valuable is the recommendations it provides for each and every resource when we open Microsoft Defender."
"Defender is a robust platform for dealing with many kinds of threats. We're protected from various threats, like viruses. Attacks can be easily minimized with this solution defending our infrastructure."
"We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
"It works seamlessly on the Azure platform because it's a Microsoft app. Its setup is similar, so if you already have a Microsoft account, it just flows into it."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"There are a few areas for improvement. One is the occasional sluggishness or latency, which is likely due to the cloud-based nature of the solution. So, the performance can be better."
"There is always room for improvement and growth."
"We still get some false positives. There are times when legitimate stuff gets flagged and it could be that somebody is expecting a very important email but they don't end up getting it. On the flip side, when we alert Check Point about stuff like this, it is corrected, so they are improving. That's a plus."
"They could improve Check Point support response times. Sometimes it takes days to resolve or even days to get a first response."
"Stability has been a pain point. I was going back and forth with my product engineer and project manager for a couple of months. I had the product in a demonstration mode and wasn't satisfied with the results initially. After a few alterations and a few revisions later, it is fine."
"They must provide security to more email service providers."
"They could continue to offer more stringent security policy measures for threat point management."
"Harmony Email & Collaboration could be improved by making the whitelist available on the website and application level."
"The solution's portal is very easy to use, but there's one key component that is missing when it comes to managing policies. For example, if I've onboarded my server and I need to specify antivirus policies, there's no option to do that on the portal. I will have to go to Intune to deploy them. That is one main aspect that is missing and it's worrisome."
"The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."
"I would suggest building a single product that addresses endpoint server protection, attack surface, and everything else in one solution. That is the main disadvantage with the product. If we are incorporating some features, we end up in a situation where this solution is for the server, and that one is for the client, or this is for identity, and that is for our application. They're not bundling it. Commercially, we can charge for different licenses, but on the implementation side, it's tough to help our end-customer understand which product they're getting."
"Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."
"One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."
"Sometimes it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or a special kind of product."
"The overview provides you with good information, but if you want more details, there is a lot more customization to do, which requires knowledge of the other supporting solutions."
"Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research."
More Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is ranked 9th in CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) with 47 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 2nd in CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) with 46 reviews. Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration writes "Has a user-friendly dashboard, a great anti-phishing algorithm, and sandboxing for testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Avanan, Mimecast Email Security, Cisco Secure Email and Barracuda Email Protection, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender XDR, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Sentinel and Wazuh. See our Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.
See our list of best CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) vendors.
We monitor all CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) 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.