We performed a comparison between Check Point SandBlast Network and Digital Guardian based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Check Point SandBlast Network is the sandboxing of PDF and Microsoft system files."
"The zero-day protection is its most valuable feature."
"It seems like it works all the time. We have never had an issue. We have never had something go undetected, anything major. All in all, it works pretty well."
"The use of threat cloud protection with its artificial intelligence can automate possible threats."
"It provides a high rate of catching the zero-day advanced threats."
"Preventing zero-day threats and extracting potential threats from incoming files with Threat Extraction is the most valuable feature for us."
"You do not need to risk your network by using the in-line sandbox."
"Very few false positives are detected, which gives the confidence to raise flags when needed, ensuring the IT department is aware of threats and acting fast."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"It has been scalable."
"The guides or best practices of Check Point are difficult to find for the client. Therefore, it is sometimes difficult to make better implementations."
"I am very leery right now about the stability. We've had three outages in the last month because of Check Point, not because of something that the customer has done, but because of changes on the Check Point side."
"Using it in the beginning was difficult because I had never used anything similar. In terms of navigating the UI, it was all not too bad, but there is definitely a learning curve."
"At the support level, they could improve the attention times and have the resolution of cases happen a little faster."
"I would like to see these solutions being easier to manage from mobile applications - from either iOS or Android - including other operating systems that appear in the future."
"There should be some customized price reductions in the offered packages."
"When you have to scan emails that come with attachments, it takes a long time to examine them, which causes other emails not to be scanned, which can cause some danger to our organization."
"EDR and EPM solutions like Carbon Black or CyberArk have integrations with the cloud version of Sandblast, however, there must be on-premise Sandblast options also."
"Technical support could be better."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
More Check Point SandBlast Network Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point SandBlast Network is ranked 8th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 33 reviews while Digital Guardian is ranked 19th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 11 reviews. Check Point SandBlast Network is rated 8.4, while Digital Guardian is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Check Point SandBlast Network writes "High detection with few false positives and able to handle large volumes of data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". Check Point SandBlast Network is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Fortinet FortiSandbox, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Trellix Network Detection and Response, whereas Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our Check Point SandBlast Network vs. Digital Guardian report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.
