What advice do you have for others considering Guardicore Infection Monkey?

In one of our banking customer environments, we used Akamai Guardicore Segmentation to segment the critical application tiers such as web, application, and database servers. Initially, we enabled visibility mode to understand the east-west traffic and identify all communication flows between workloads. During this phase, we discovered several unnecessary open communications, especially between application and database layers. Based on this, we created granular segmentation policies to allow only required ports and protocols and blocked all other unnecessary traffic. For example, only specific application servers were allowed to communicate with the database servers on required ports while all other lateral movement paths were restricted. One additional point I would highlight is that with Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, we do not just use it for static segmentation, but also for continuous monitoring and policy optimization. Even after the initial deployment, we regularly review the traffic patterns and update the policies based on application changes. This is very important in dynamic environments such as banking, where new service integrations are frequently introduced. Another key aspect is that we use it as a part of a broader zero-trust strategy, integrating it with other security solutions such as WAF and secure web gateways to create a layered defense approach. Also, from an operational perspective, it has helped us to reduce the dependency on traditional network-based segmentation, making security more application-aware and flexible, especially in hybrid and cloud environments. The visualization feature in Akamai Guardicore Segmentation has been extremely helpful for our daily operations, especially in troubleshooting and policy design. From a troubleshooting perspective, it gives us a clear, real-time view of communication flows between workloads. Instead of checking logs manually, we can quickly identify where traffic is being allowed or blocked. This significantly reduces the time required to identify issues. For policy design, the visualization helps us to understand the application dependencies before enforcing any rules. This ensures we do not accidentally block legitimate traffic, which is very critical in banking environments. It also helps in identifying unnecessary or suspicious communication paths, validating policies after implementation, and collaborating with application teams, since the visual maps are easy to understand even for non-security teams. Overall, it makes both troubleshooting faster and policy creation more accurate, reducing the operational effort and minimizing the business impact. Based on our experience with Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, we have seen a noticeable improvement in both troubleshooting and policy validation timelines. Earlier, troubleshooting east-west communication issues used to take around two to four hours since we had to rely on manual log analysis and multiple tools. With Guardicore visualization, we can now identify the issue within twenty to thirty-five minutes, which is roughly around sixty-five percent to eighty-five percent reduction in troubleshooting time. For policy validation, it previously took several hours to a full day, especially when coordinating with application teams. Now with the clear dependency mapping and real-time visibility, we are able to validate policies within thirty-five to sixty-five minutes, improving efficiency by around fifty-five percent to seventy-five percent. Additionally, incident response time improved by fifty-five percent, policy deployment errors reduced significantly due to better visibility, and faster onboarding of newer applications since dependencies are clearly mapped. Overall, these improvements have helped our team become more efficient, proactive, and accurate in operations. My main advice for anyone considering Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is to start with the visibility mode before enforcing any policies. Understanding application dependencies and traffic flow is very important to avoid unintended disruptions. Also, involve application and infrastructure teams early in the process since accurate segmentation depends on knowing how applications communicate. I recommend taking a phased approach by starting with monitoring and mapping, identifying the required versus unnecessary traffic, and gradually enforcing the policies. Additionally, keep policies simple and structured initially and refine them over time as you gain more visibility. Overall, if implemented properly, it is a very effective solution for achieving zero-trust and reducing lateral movement risks. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is a very effective solution for organizations looking to strengthen their zero-trust security model, especially in complex hybrid environments. What stands out the most is its ability to provide deep visibility and control over east-west traffic, which is something traditional security solutions often lack. While there are areas for improvement such as policy management simplicity and automation, the core capabilities are very strong and deliver real value in terms of security, operational efficiency, and compliance. From my experience, when implemented with the right approach, it can significantly enhance an organization’s overall security posture and reduce lateral movement risk. I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

I gave this product a review rating of 10.

My advice for others looking into using Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is that visibility is crucial. If you are not seeing your network clearly, your job is challenging. Visibility is the main word in Akamai Guardicore Segmentation. Our company has a business relationship with Akamai as we are a partner or reseller. I rate this product a ten out of ten.

Since I started using Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, we have not had any situations that demonstrate specific results or metrics such as fewer incidents or improved compliance. My advice to others looking into using Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is to work with professional services during setup because it is not intuitive at the beginning and to take the administrator course to understand the Reveal Maps, as the Reveal Maps are the most useful way to control the segmentation. I give this product a rating of 8.

Overall, I would rate the product a seven out of ten. We use Akamai because they have their own enforcement point. This was important for us. Other micro-segmentation tools use the desktop firewall of Windows or the Linux iptables firewall, but Guardicore has its own enforcement point and its own agent. This was a key factor. When you start with the implementation, you have to have a clear picture about your labeling. I think it’s really important. You have to know what you want to separate from each other. You could go into very deep detail, but the more detail you have, the more complex it becomes. You have to find a balance between detail and complexity. You need the middle way.

Micro-segmentation should be a specific requirement because, nowadays, many built-in solutions offer similar functionality. Akamai provides Guardicore as an external SaaS service for those needing it in a SaaS environment. However, for on-premises installations, integration with network vendors like Cisco is crucial. This could be done by customers themselves or through partnerships with other network vendors. Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Overall, I rate Akamai Guardicore Segmentation a nine out of ten.

I rate Akamai Guardicore Segmentation an eight out of ten. Adopting the product often involves a greenfield approach, requiring adjustments and careful planning.

I would say that you should use it for micro-segmentation instead of trying to use firewalls. Because some customers try to use other solutions like firewalls, and it's not the best solution. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. It is an amazing solution.

I would rate the solution a six out of ten. We mostly have enterprise customers for Guardicore Centra. I would advise users to try this out on a handful of servers for the first time (like < 20 servers to begin with). During and after segmentation, monitor the solution for some period to notice how operationally effective it is and the data sources relied upon for building labels, and policies, and ultimately how easy it is to incorporate any changes needed thereafter.

I feel both companies are trying hard to better themselves, therefore it's difficult to say. Illumio may be far ahead in six months or the opposite, it all depends on that and the precise moment. I wouldn't say one product is superior to another; it all depends on the customer's needs and so on. However, in this scenario, the customer has a large number of legacy, old XP, and Windows 2003 legacy servers, as well as other operating systems. In this instance, Guardicore was our recommendation, but for other clients who don't have that history, Illumio is just as excellent as Guardicore. It's the best, I would rate Guardicore Centra a ten out of ten.

We're partners with Guardicore. I'm not sure which version of the solution we are using at this time. I would rate the solution at a six out of ten. The support for Kubernetes is still missing. They're working on it. It's in the roadmap. That will make it better. That said, right now, it does more than 50% of what we need it to do and it's been good.

I would advise others to get a demo but also check out other products to make sure that it is a good fit for you. Every product is not good for every place. It has been pretty good for my use case. I didn't find anything terrible or not good. I would rate Guardicore Infection Monkey an eight out of ten.