We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and Claroty Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about TeamViewer, Microsoft, Citrix and others in Remote Access."Setup using the manuals was easy."
"A single login based on a second authentication factor is giving us the possibility of integrating third-party services for authentication based on a security scheme."
"I found the MEP feature the most valuable. This has improved users' latency allowing the users to connect to the nearest Azure Check Point VM."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Our users find the interface very comfortable to use."
"Setting policies allow, block, and limit users' access."
"The IPSec VPN, Mobile Access, and Identity Awareness are three of the blades with which we have been working with since the pandemic. This has given us great mobility, making our network more dynamic."
"It is a scalable solution...The technical support team of the solution is very good."
"The product helps mitigate potential threats, especially if its users have signature rules. The product also provides alerts."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN handles up to a hundred megabytes for clients, but I want it to be able to handle up to one gigabyte."
"We are very happy with the Windows client. You log in with the VPN for the full client, you do the log in there. But for Linux machines, they don't have a full client to install. It is important because we have some users that use Linux and they don't have a specific application from Check Point to use. That is something that could be improved."
"Price category and smooth renewal of agreement should be considered for flawless and quick onboarding of clients and partners."
"The product’s architecture is a bit distributed."
"I cannot see the full effect of the endpoint solution because it relies on having access to the DNF queries, which might not go through the Check Point firewall when you're using it for perimeter networks. Check Point will not identify the actual source of the net queries. This may be related to the architecture, however, and not poor product issues. I don't know if it can be improved on the Check Point side or not."
"We would like to see support for a layer seven VPN over UDP."
"There was complexity in the initial setup."
"Some configurations, like idle timeout (the requirement came from multiple users), are not possible to configure directly from the Check Point management server."
"The product's integration capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 4th in Remote Access with 60 reviews while Claroty Platform is ranked 22nd in Remote Access with 1 review. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while Claroty Platform is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Claroty Platform writes "Provides good visibility of the devices in a user's environment". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas Claroty Platform is most compared with Nozomi Networks, Tenable OT Security, Dragos, Darktrace and Armis.
See our list of best Remote Access vendors.
We monitor all Remote Access 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.