Our primary use case for Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is for securing our multi-cloud environment, AWS, Azure, by providing continuous posture management, threat detection, and compliance monitoring. We use it to identify misconfigurations, enforce security best practices, and monitor cloud workloads in real-time. It also helps us with vulnerability scanning and keeping our environment compliant to frameworks such as CIS, GDPR, etc.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP flagged a misconfiguration in our AWS S3 bucket that had overly permissive access settings. That configuration could have exposed our sensitive data to the public internet. The platform not only identified the issue but also provided remediation that our team was able to apply immediately. This prevented a potential data exposure.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP offers a unified, modular platform that combines CSPM, CWPP, CIEM, code security, and cloud detection and response. The agentless workload posture, real-time threat detection and response, multi-cloud coverage and visibility, compliance automation, and one-click remediations stand out as its best features.

I find myself relying on the risk management engine and prioritization the most day-to-day. In any cloud environment, you are flooded with findings, misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, and compliance gaps. Without prioritization, it is overwhelming for our team to take care of the posture. CloudGuard's risk scoring helps us cut through incidents. This makes remediation faster and focused instead of wasting time checking every alert. We get to fix the issues that pose real business risks.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP has positively impacted our organization at a significant level. We get greater visibility and control across all our cloud environments. Some biggest benefits we have seen are faster detection and remediation of misconfigurations, improved compliance posture, reduced risk exposure, operational efficiency, and cost savings. Overall, it has made our cloud environment more secure, compliant, and easier to manage while freeing up our teams to focus on projects instead of chasing alerts.

Areas of improvement for Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP can be the UI navigation. The dashboard is feature-rich, but it can sometimes feel overwhelming. A more streamlined or customizable view would help teams focus on the highest priority risks more quickly. While it integrates with AWS and GCP, deeper integration with DevOps and third-party SIEM tools could make workflows even smoother. For first-time users, the documentation could be more intuitive or hands-on.

Positive

I previously used different solutions, specifically native cloud security tools such as AWS Security Hub and Azure Security Center with manual compliance checks. While they provided some visibility, they lacked a unified multi-cloud view and deep threat prevention capabilities. We switched to Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP because it consolidated compliance, posture management, and threat protection, reducing tool sprawl and giving us stronger coverage across AWS and GCP.

We have seen measurable outcomes since using Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP, with time saving being a significant outcome. We reduced manual compliance checks by about 40 to 50%, saving our team 10 to 12 hours per week. The compliance has improved as our overall compliance score against CIS benchmark has improved from around 72 to 92% within the first three months of adoption. We also saw a drop in recurring misconfigurations after enabling continuous posture management and automated guardrails.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing model is flexible and consumption-based, which makes it easier to align with our cloud. The setup cost was moderate, not too heavy. In terms of ROI, we can see time savings for audit preparation of at least 30-40%.

I would rate Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP an eight out of ten, because it is powerful and reliable, but still has room for polish.

I provided this rating because it delivers strong visibility, compliance, and misconfiguration detection, but there are still areas that could be refined such as complex UI navigation, integration gaps, and alert fatigue.

If you are considering Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP, start by clearly mapping out your cloud environments and compliance needs. The platform is effective for leveraging single visibility across AWS, Azure, GCP. Ensure you integrate all accounts early on. Take time to configure policies to match your organization's compliance framework such as CIS, GDPR, PCI. This saves a lot of effort later.

I assess the effectiveness of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP in preventing misconfigurations across cloud environments as an important part.

The ability of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP to secure multi-cloud environments has impacted my customer's compliance efforts; it is not the priority, but it is an important solution.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is effective. It is not as powerful as Harmony and Collaboration, but it is a challenging solution.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP has some advantages over its competitors.

One of the best features is easy integration.

The automated threat prevention of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is impressive. It uses the same model and engine as antivirus or Harmony and Collaboration, making it effective.

I find false positives to be the most valuable metrics for threat detection. The number of false positives is important.

I assess the role of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP in providing real-time visibility into cloud infrastructure depending on the client, and we usually do a business case to address that.

There is a lack of functionalities and usability. I used to compare it with another solution that is focused on specific features. All solutions have some gaps, and we are looking for the best one in every single scope.

I believe improvements could be made to the notification system, ease of use, and integrations.

The interface could be simplified and more focused on user experience. It appears somewhat unrefined in its current state.

If they improve their interface and integration capabilities, I would give them a higher rating.

The technical support provided by Check Point is really good.

I would rate their technical support as eight out of ten.

Positive

I find the initial setup easy to integrate. The main challenge is maximizing the solution's potential.

To get the full power of the solution, you need to fine-tune it extensively to achieve the expected behavior.

I consider the pricing of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP to be average.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP a seven.

I came from a compliance world where I focused on static configuration checks. I have now evolved more towards a CDR approach, where I actively monitor cloud detection and response as well. I am monitoring activities in the clouds, including Azure, AWS, and Oracle, OCI.

I transitioned from unstructured cloud environments, described as a bit like the Wild West, lacking oversight. Now, I have established specific rule sets based on compliance standards, which I have adapted to suit my use case. CloudGuard greatly assists me in understanding my assets, assessing my security, and identifying risk areas.

The compliance is well executed, and the CDR is evolving, with both progressing well. 

We use the CloudGuard CNAPP CloudGuard Security Posture Management capabilities. It's good for identifying misconfiguration. You have a a variety of rulesets that you can apply. So you can choose on depending on which on which industry standard that you are following. And you can really adapt it towards your environment, so you can mix and match what you need and really come to a more secure cloud environment.  

The effectiveness of its cloud security posture management for providing compliance rule sets and security best practices has been good. You can define KPIs in CNAPP. You can say: "this is the percentage that we want to work towards." And you can see your progress and say, "okay, at the beginning of the month, we are we are at 60%. And at the end of the year, we are there 80% compliance." You can do that. And you can really monitor it.

The cloud security posture management identify the risks that are the most critical to our business. We can define certain key assets that are your crown jewels. And whenever something hits on these crown jewels, you get a very high score. So you can really fine tune towards protecting your risk based assets in the cloud. 

It also lowered the amount of time it takes when identifying of the most critical risks. If I would do that manually, it would take me ages. So when I have a fine tuned rule set that I that I apply upon all my workloads, I do have automatic identification of every resource. The time savings are indefinite.

The CloudGuard CNAPP visibility into CloudGuard logs for simplifying incident investigation is very good. It can reach CloudGuard VPC flow logs and GoToKey events, and it can also look at Azure activity logs. So you can have multi cloud capability, CDR, and you have different rule sets that are quite good. So far, it's excellent.

The CDR helps detect anomalous behavior and respond to threats before they become an issue. We had we had some third party products that were using that was not properly configured. CDR detected this when it was doing certain certain scans. We updated the role towards the policy that that CDR provided, and it really helped. The events went away. 

The user interface needs work. Sometimes, it is a transition from the old tool to the new CNAPP Two that I currently have, and remnants of the old environment can still be detected. I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel. 

More work is needed in fine-tuning the threat data towards your CSPM and activity logs, aligning them with business intelligence, which requires a cohesive console interface.

My assessment of CloudGuard CDRs in intrusion detection and threat hunting capabilities is that it still needs some work. All the threat data that comes in, you need to fine tune it a bit.  

I have used the solution for four years.

The stability could always improve. It is an ever-changing world. It is rapidly evolving, and sometimes mistakes occur, necessitating testing. Every cloud security provider experiences challenges like that.

The solution scales well. You just apply the the policy and the rule sets. You apply your configuration, and it scales indefinitely.

I have a dedicated support engineer and a presales engineer dedicated to me. Additionally, I have a project manager. Overall, it's a good setup.

Positive

I used the Security Hub inside AWS. CloudGuard offers more rule sets and is better streamlined.

The initial setup was a bit cumbersome in the in the beginning, however, it improved a lot. Now it's it's working fine. 

I am the integrator that handles the initial setup.

Monitoring cloud security automatically ensures a return on investment. When I deploy applications in a UAT environment, setting rule sets beforehand guarantees adherence. When deviations occur, corrections are made, thereby ensuring compliance.

From a licensing and cost perspective, it is really competitive. It is one of the better options available.

Before switching, I evaluated solutions like Palo Alto, Prisma CloudGuard, Trend Micro Cloud Conformity, and now I use CNAPP Pro. The deciding factor for choosing CNAPP was cost.

I advise the company to keep evolving and keep it up. Open-source vendors are entering the scene and evolving rapidly, so staying up to speed is essential. 

I rate the solution seven out of ten.

I use the solution for some cloud applications, which are cloud-native.

The solution helps increase security posture and provides a greater scope for protection. 

I value the comfort and the ability to receive proper insights almost hands-off. It sends us the information of interest. It offers very good security posture management capabilities. We're receiving the information of interest, like security posture, details, settings, and so on. And the solution is spot-on. There are capabilities to check actions to mitigate and measures and controls that come with these features are valuable.

It's providing compliance rule sets and security best practices.

One of the main reasons we use the solution is that it is great at identifying risks that are critical to our business. It saves us time at identifying risks. I might save one FTE continuously checking in. 

We use the CDR (the intelligence capabilities). It's helpful and does the job.

The solution detects anomalous behavior. We don't have any issues. 

I would appreciate a way to receive periodic updates, like through email. I am the kind of person who likes to receive data passively. It would be nice to have periodic updates on what people should do, maybe with some analysis or something.

I have used the solution for about four months.

The stability is good. It does its job.

It was good in terms of scalability.

I found the customer service to be very professional, great, and very spot-on.

Positive

We did not previously use a different solution. 

The initial setup was very easy.

I completed the implementation together with a colleague from Check Point. The experience was very professional.

We had the 60-day evaluation already. It's now something we have to pay.

I did not consider alternate solutions.

I would rate the solution ten out of ten although I have no other comparison.

The solution is for used for protection of workloads.

It offers good detection. This capability allows us to effectively manage compliance. 

It helps us find misconfiguration. We use it to try to find possible storage accounts that may be misused or other misconfigurations.

The effectiveness of its cloud security posture management is good. It's really helpful for us and allows us to comply with various standards.

It helps our company identify risks that are most critical to our business. It not only saves us time, it provides us with the visibility we need to manage the cloud.

I don't have any notes for improvements. I'd need some more time to work with it.

I have used the solution for one year.

The stability is good.

We haven't had issues with scalability.

We have not had any issues with customer service so far.

Positive

This was the first solution I tested. I have not used a different solution. 

The initial setup was straightforward.

The pricing is decent.

We only really tested the capabilities of native tools before we implemented this solution.

My overall product rating is ten out of ten.

I am using most of the CSPM functionality, primarily providing assessments for my customer bases with the CNAPP CSPM functionality. 

I conduct benchmarks and compare the cloud infrastructure with, for example, the CIS benchmarks or other types of benchmarks depending on my customer needs. That's my main use case, to be honest. 

It is not yet the workload protection point. I see that evolving. For now, it is more about CSPM.

It's helped with misconfigurations.

Detecting misconfigurations in the cloud is what the CSPM delivers. I often see that small mistakes and misconfigurations can lead to bigger impacts. That's why I focus on finding those. It saves a lot of time, especially in dynamic environments where we see cloud infrastructure is built up and taken down again, and different parts are deployed in various locations. It delivers fast value, and it's way faster than it would be without it.

We use the Cloud Security Posture Management capabilities. It's perfect for our use cases. Onboarding is very easy. Selecting a benchmark is easy. Defining custom rules is easy, as well, to be honest. This is the part we most rely on.

The Posture management provides rules and checks for security best practices. It's good. That's really the component that is the most valuable for us and our customers and the most easy to implement. It's critical to the business. We provide security services like assessments based on that functionality. That's why our customers come to us. And if this component wouldn't do what it's intended to, then our business would really be affected in a negative way.

The shift left part is not yet at a maturity level I desire. I need more integration from the code-to-cloud principle. It feels somewhat fractured to me. I haven't grasped all the parts yet, and better integration would make CNAPP most valuable.

I have been using it for roughly a year plus. It's been about a year and a half.

From the product itself, CNAPP is pretty stable. Sometimes I might experience that some functionalities aren't described transparently enough for me. It's hard to grasp how it works in the background, and I sometimes need to contact someone to get that information. 

Overall, the product itself is stable. However, if there are errors, it is sometimes challenging to elaborate or troubleshoot since it is not transparent enough to understand what to search for.

Regarding scalability, there is not really a need for scaling up or down. It is good. I never had any performance-related issues. 

We've never had any big integrations with other products within the environment. 

Customer service is very good. When I need help or have open questions, or if I require the capability to deploy a quick test environment, there are always people I can contact at Check Point to get my information or the environment as fast as I need it. I love it. This is basically one of the main reasons why I love working with Check Point products.

Positive

Depending on the cloud environments, I mostly used the native components, such as Defender for Cloud on Azure. I conducted many comparisons, even in some community sessions within my company, and found that Defender for Cloud is not as capable as CloudGuard, especially in multi-cloud environments. It is not as easy to use and has some drawbacks. 

Of course, it is easier to integrate native since it is already there; you just press the button, and it's available. However, the overall solution isn't as mature as the one from Check Point. 

I also paired up with other vendors like Tenable, Palo Alto, and Wiz, and observed that CNAPP is not CNAPP. Depending on where the vendor is coming from, different aspects may be better or more mature than others. It is all somehow speeding up in this very dynamic environment. We always have to redo evaluations and see the current status to keep up.

It's hard to gauge ROI for our specific use case. It's not measurable from our point of view. 

It's not too expensive. However, it is sometimes hard to explain to customers why they should pay this price, and I need to elaborate on that. It is not cheap, of course, yet it is a necessity.

We do not so much use the workload protection capabilities yet. We also do not use the CloudGuard Detection Response.

We're a partner of Check Point. 

Some areas still need development, however it is a very solid solution, definitely. I would rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is primarily designed to protect cloud-native applications and their underlying infrastructure from cyber threats. The primary use cases of this solution are comprehensive cloud security, workload protection, cloud security posture management, DevSecOps integration, threat detection and response, compliance and risk management.

Checkpoint CloudGuard Cnapp has improved efficiency, accuracy, cost-effectiveness, data-driven decision making and customer satisfaction.

The valuable features of Checkpoint CloudGuard CNAPP are automation capabilities, integration with existing systems, real-time analytics and reporting, customization and flexibility, security and compliance, scalability and growth support and a user-friendly interface.

Improvements can be made to the user interface, performance and reliability, security and compliance, and customer support.

I've used the solution for the past year.

The stability is good.

The scalability is nice.

Technical support is good.

Positive

No, I did not previously use a different solution. 

The solution was set up via our in-house team.

The ROI is okay.

The pricing and licensing can be improved.

No, I did not evaluate another solution. 

CloudGuard CNAPP has many use cases depending on your business requirements. If your organization's infrastructure is spread across various cloud vendors, such as AWS, GCP, and Azure, you can implement CNAPP. 

Our use case entails gaining visibility into cloud components. We have an infrastructure platform where our resources are deployed. We are now focusing on having a clear visibility of all the cloud platforms, whether it is AWS, Azure, or GCP.

CloudGuard expands your visibility. If your infrastructure is segregated across AWS, Azure, and GCP, it can track all the resources deployed on these cloud vendors. It covers any cloud devices like S3 buckets, containers, etc. You get clear visibility of all those resources, and it helps to check for misconfigurations. 

For example, if you have an S3 bucket exposed publicly, that is a security concern. You need to do things to ensure that your S3 bucket is kept private when configuring it. It will evaluate your security configuration with respect to the deployed resources and give you the scores. CloudGuard will tell you where your resources stand regarding configuration, security scores, compliance checks, etc. It gives you all the visibility within the single platform. 

It also protects your workload. The features of the traditional CSPM can be varied. If you have deployed an application running on a Kubernetes cluster, it will give you visibility into all clusters and the workloads deployed and running in the background if you want to scale the workloads.

When you perform all the activities on the back end, there are a lot of chances that you misconfigure. Any misconfigurations within the namespace of the Kubernetes cluster can lead to a security vulnerability. When it's exposed publicly, it can add some more risk. All of those things can be easily tracked in some of the recent cloud vendors. 

Wiz is one of the industry contenders within the CNAPP solution. In addition, there are a couple of other vendors like Orca. All of these vendors provide workload protection in addition to the typical CSPM.

If most of your resources are deployed in CloudGuard, one of the bigger concerns
is the failure to monitor your devices. You can only protect the things you can see. You cannot take action if you don't have visibility into how your resources are deployed or distributed. 

Regardless of scale, it gives any cloud-dependent organization an edge over the other technologies so that they can track their infrastructure. You can see where your resources are deployed and how they perform regarding health checkups, security misconfigurations, compliance checks, etc. So it gives you better visibility. 

Most of the features are pretty valuable, whether that's a description of the attacks or the attack graph showing the vulnerabilities. If a single tool does all this work, the value is centralizing all these functions on a single tool. These are the cloud-native applications we talk about — containers, Kubernetes, and cloud infrastructure — and all those things are the primary focus of the CNAPP solution. 

I think EDR, MDR, and any of those systems do a great job at the endpoint level, but you need CDR if you want to use those features on a cloud level. For example, if a VM is deployed, it can also detect all misconfiguration there. In addition, if any of these are critical, it will show you the attack graph. 

It shows you all the pictures from the attacker's perspective, such as if there is some loophole at your gateway level and if the traffic is coming from the Internet. If you have misconfigurations at the gateway level, it will give you the attack path the attacker can use to enter your organization. If you enter, it shows how you can move laterally if some additional new points can be exploited within your infrastructure. It gives you a list of any misconfigurations in terms of user access.

Regarding the response part, the onus is on the department or the team implementing those technologies because you need to have strong processes, policies, and procedures. For example, if you can address some of the detections or vulnerabilities at the application or cloud level, you should have a policy to prioritize those things in your organization. Once you have those policies, you can lead in those scenarios and maybe collaborate with different teams responsible for addressing those new issues. 

It involves some coordination and collaboration as well. At the end of the day, you want to make things easier, so you can provision access for the various teams within that platform if they want to consume these things directly rather than getting the information via a report or any other mechanism. Let's say there's a problem with your S3 bucket, and you need to fix issues inside that rather than fixing them in the CNAPP solution. CNAPP is something that gives you an overview, but you need a process for the remediation.

CloudGuard's reporting could be better. It's good now, but there is room for improvement. If you're looking for a centralized platform, there are a lot of features that can be appreciated. However, you want complete security integration with SaaS, DAST, secret scanning, etc., and a single platform for all these features. 

Check Point is known for its firewall. Six or seven years ago, it used to be a good thing because most businesses were on on-prem. If your business is on the cloud, you do not need a firewall because most of the cloud vendors already have that built into their cloud premises, and you can configure the rules there. You can do everything as a network security engineer. 

It depends on your business model. Some companies are segregated and most of their things are on-prem. They have physical outlets in multiple countries. Managing everything in these business environments and deploying the Check Point firewall would be a good investment. However, it doesn't make sense if your business is totally in the cloud. 

It depends on how Check Point sees things in the market. If they want to compete with all these vendors in terms of CNAPP, they need to first understand their audience. Once they have some visibility into who their audience is, they need to maintain their business. 

I am evaluating CNAPP vendors for my organization, and Check Point Cloudguard is one of them. I have evaluated all the other vendors, so I have the experience.

One vendor I worked with in the CNAPP market was Rapid7. They have a CSPM tool called InsightCloudSec that offers similar visibility of all cloud resources. The various cloud vendors are populated over the platform, and you can see the same things. However, some features are available in other vendors, like Wiz or Orca that are missing in Rapid7. They are trying to incorporate some of the features they lack, but there's still a long way to go. 

It's more about how you leverage the APIs of the cloud provider so that you can get the data and make things as easy as possible for the end user. You do not want to overwhelm them with so much data. You want the information that's necessary for your organization to take action. Wiz and Orca are the industry standard for CNAPP solutions. I would rate Wiz nine out of 10 and Orca eight out of 10, but Rapid7 ICS would receive five out of 10. In terms of CNAPP features, I don't think Check Point is a competitor here. Check Point generally focuses on things related to the firewall, such as VPN, etc. 

Deploying CloudGuard is pretty straightforward. You don't need to invest much time because the deployment model isn't rigorous. You establish the connection with your CloudGuard vendor, and it takes a few hours. There are additional steps if you want to configure more in-depth to get more visibility into your Kubernetes cluster. It doesn't require any agent to be installed on your resources, which is a good thing.  

If you're running a serverless architecture like AWS Lambda and you want better visibility in those complex scenarios, there are some additional configurations that require you to check some documentation that you need to go through. However, it takes only a few hours to achieve visibility into the typical cloud resources, such as EC2 instances, S3 buckets, containers, and user accounts. 

All these technologies are expensive. Wiz is the most expensive. You might have seen that Google is making overtures toward acquiring Wiz. It's valued at $12 billion, but it may go as high as $24 billion, which would make it the most expensive acquisition in Google's history. The bottom line is that you need to spend a good amount of money to implement these things and it depends on your organization's priorities. 

I rate Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP six out of 10. 

I work with the solution for patching over all the cloud vulnerabilities. We have a different monitoring team that monitors all the alerts on the solution. They send us a report, and we work on that report to patch all the vulnerabilities of our cloud environment, such as Azure and AWS.

The solution's main benefit is that it automates all the patching and reporting parts and generates an automated report. The solution automatically notifies you whenever any alert comes into your cloud environment via mail or message.

Sometimes, the solution provides us with false alerts of vulnerabilities that are not present in our cloud environment. The solution should include an auto-remediation feature, which most tools currently provide.

I have been using the solution for three years.

Apart from the occasional false positives in the reports, we haven't had any issues with the solution's performance or stability.

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is a scalable solution.

The solution is implemented in multiple locations, and each location has around 300 users.

We contacted the technical support team during the deployment phase, and their support was very good and responsive.

Positive

We previously used CrowdStrike. We switched to Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP because CrowdStrike lacked many features. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is a more advanced version of CrowdStrike, integrated with AI capabilities. It also provides different automatic reports, such as compliance reports.

Around three to four people were involved in the solution's deployment. Since there are multiple environments in the cloud, it takes an entire day to deploy the tool.

The solution's cloud security posture management scans your cloud environment and cloud-configured policies and gives you a report of all the loopholes in your cloud environment. You can also get compliance reports from the solution, and I am completely satisfied with its effectiveness.

The solution's cloud security posture management identifies risks most critical to the business and segregates them into low, medium, and high categories. The solution's workload protection capabilities provide protection for VMs. The scanning provided by the solution's workload protection capabilities helps us identify problems before they go live.

We can schedule the solution to scan our cloud environment daily for vulnerabilities. The solution takes 20 to 25 minutes to scan the entire cloud environment. Earlier, it used to take an entire day because we had to perform all the manual tasks to find out all the loopholes in our cloud environment.

Before using the solution, we used to spend an entire day finding all the loopholes in our cloud environment. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP automated most of our tasks by providing automatic reports to our security team. We also use the solution's CDR capabilities.

The visibility we get from the solution's CDR capabilities helps simplify incident investigation time or process. After providing all the loopholes in our cloud environment, the solution provides a step-by-step remediation plan to fix particular vulnerabilities. We extract the report from the tool and work on the patching part.

We perform intrusion detection and threat hunting from the same console. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is a SaaS-based solution. All the configurations have gone through the secret key we fetch from the cloud environment and integrate with the solution. From there, it fetches all the configurations for the entire cloud environment.

I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

As a manufacturing company, we always ensure our production and workloads are not being interrupted by anything. Therefore, we are making sure our automated processes are not hindered by any means. 

As we have many cloud-based applications, CloudGuard gives us prime support in terms of the security of the system. This includes securing cloud workloads, applications, and data by integrating threat prevention, detection, and response capabilities. 

It also ensures compliance and governance across multi-cloud environments.

It provides complete visibility and control over cloud-native applications and infrastructure, allowing our security teams to monitor and manage every part of their cloud environments. 

CloudGuard CNAPP also assures compliance with industry standards and regulatory requirements by automating governance and risk management procedures. This streamlines security management and lowers the operational strain on our IT teams, allowing them to focus on strategic goals. We are able to work freely by putting aside some additional stress.

The most useful element of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is its advanced threat prevention capabilities. This functionality is vital because it proactively addresses security issues before they affect cloud applications and notifies a real-time incident, ensuring the integrity and availability of critical services. 

Furthermore, the platform's full visibility and control across many cloud environments allows us to effectively monitor the security posture, uncover vulnerabilities, and consistently enforce security standards.

The management and monitoring of security regulations and incidents might be made easier by improving the user interface, which could be made more intuitive and user-friendly. 

For businesses with varied IT ecosystems, increasing the integration capabilities with additional third-party products and services would also increase flexibility and user-friendliness. 

To further reduce the amount of manual work required by security teams, the future release could benefit from more sophisticated automation capabilities, such as automated incident response and remediation workflows. 

In order to facilitate better decision-making and strategic planning, improved analytics and reporting capabilities would also be beneficial. These would provide deeper insights into security occurrences and patterns.

I've used the solution for two years. 

I'd rate stability nine out of ten.

I'd rate scalability nine out of ten.

Technical support has to be improved.

Neutral

We have not used a different solution previously.

The initial setup is complex.

We implemented it through the vendor. I'd rate the services eight out of ten.

Our inhouse IT department's workload has reduced considerably since using the product. 

Setup cost and licensing are quite expensive. 

We did not evaluate other solutions. 

For two years the product has done its job perfectly.