Check Point CloudGuard Code Security
Ratings and reviews
Advanced protection has secured APIs and simplified centralized network defense
What is our primary use case?
I have been working with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for 14 years.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is particularly useful for protecting my network from external attacks, such as DDoS attacks and broken authentication.
Regarding which product of Check Point I would like feedback about, I chose Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) solution.
What is most valuable?
What I appreciate about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is that it has an auto-enabled CDN within it, which helps us because even if there are floodgates created by an attacker, the CDN gets enabled automatically, and the UI is well organized, so even if a graduate comes in and tries to explore it, they are able to do so.
Moreover, network segmentation can be done very easily using WAF.
The key benefits I have seen from using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is that it can be centrally managed, so if we have ten firewalls, they can be centrally managed through one center and one platform, which is one of the key features I appreciated.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) has improved my ability to discover, monitor, and protect APIs so that our security risk, which was ambient earlier, is now green, and the security posture assessment by third-party evaluators shows we are green.
What needs improvement?
Regarding the false positive rate, we need to configure it according to our environment because unless we configure it according to our environment, it's a tedious process, particularly with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), and sometimes if it's not configured properly, there are more than 60% of false positives that we receive.
Apart from the configuration aspect, I would like to see improvements in false positives, and the second part is endpoint security because there is no agentless control. If endpoints can be managed using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), that would be very beneficial, rather than it being just a firewall.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)'s AI-driven threat detection and prevention capabilities is one area wherein I believe Check Point lacks, as I did not find many AI features in Check Point, but compared to Palo Alto, they have better AI capabilities.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
When it comes to stability and reliability, I find Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) stable.
We do have crashes, downtimes, and performance issues, but we receive good support from Check Point, so it is taken care of by the Check Point vendor.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
When it comes to scalability, I would rate it as nine out of ten, as it's very easy to scale, and whenever we bring in some VLANs or different networks, we can easily integrate them within Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
How are customer service and support?
I would rate the technical support of Check Point as eight out of ten.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Prior to adopting Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), I previously used a different solution called SentinelOne.
How was the initial setup?
Before implementing Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), I was trying to solve network security challenges, particularly all the challenges that exist for network security.
What about the implementation team?
I utilize Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) alongside Check Point Firewall, which is the basic firewall.
What was our ROI?
Since implementing Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), it has helped us to get more business, and along with that, we are able to prevent threats to our organization using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Apart from the pricing, other differences I found include that Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is centralized, as ASA does not have centralized management, and although Palo Alto does, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is found to be more user-friendly.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
The main reasons I selected Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) over other solutions were that it is a smarter firewall than others, and it was more cost-effective compared to Palo Alto, as they provided a lengthy quotation, and ASA is a legendary solution, but no one uses ASA nowadays.
What other advice do I have?
For assessing Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for preemptively blocking zero-day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies, we particularly use CrowdStrike for that function, as we detect using CrowdStrike, and there is not much on Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)'s side.
For ZTNA, I can maintain a ZTNA using certain MFAs or enabling certain network controls, so on the ZTNA side, it performs well.
Regarding integration, how Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) and firewalls integrate with my existing systems, I find the integration with third parties straightforward as I have not encountered challenges, complexities, or needed to work on or enable anything there.
I do not find any challenges with the ongoing management of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), so maintenance is very smooth, and I do not face any issues with that.
I purchased Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) through a vendor, not directly through Check Point Technologies.
Given my experience with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) and other technologies, I recommend Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). I would recommend it primarily for its scalability, which is very easy to scale, and the integration capability, as we can integrate it easily with systems like Splunk or any other SIEM devices. My overall review rating for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 8.5 out of 10.
AI-driven protection has secured our cloud APIs and reduced false positives for dynamic workloads
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is web application API protection in cloud-native, hybrid, and multi-cloud environments, where it provides automated AI-driven threat prevention, comprehensive API security, zero-day and OWASP Top 10 protection, as well as bot protection and DDoS mitigation.
As a scenario, I can describe a broken object level authorization attack where an enterprise is running a containerized microservice application deployed via Terraform or Docker. The front end communicates with the back-end service through a REST API, and user authentication is handled by a central identity and access management provider such as OAuth2. The attack vector involved an attacker logging in with valid, low-privilege user credentials, which led them to probe the application's back-end endpoint. After requesting their own authorized record, they deployed a script to iterate through other IDs to scrape sensitive data from other tenants. Since the API calls are perfectly formatted and authenticated, a legacy signature-based WAF would typically allow this traffic through. However, the mitigation flow includes automatic schema enforcement, behavioral baseline, IAM context awareness, and surgical blocking. By applying these techniques, we can shift from static rule maintenance to dynamic, context-aware analysis, which is where Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) applies.
What is most valuable?
The best feature Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) offers is API security.
The features that stand out to me within Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) include the contextual AI threat engine, which I find to be a very useful tool, as well as automated API discovery. Additionally, I appreciate the unified multi-cloud management that allows for the management of policies, logs, and analytics across hybrid and multi-cloud environments through a single control plane.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) has positively impacted my organization by reducing rule maintenance, leading to less or near-zero false positives, and enabling frictionless DevSecOps alignment. Regarding Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) AI capabilities, it possesses local logging control, PII reduction, log suppression, tenant isolation, and deterministic threat scoring. The granular rule-based access list and auditability are also crucial, as they allow for enforcing strict rule-based access control and maintaining immutable audit logs for all admin actions and support access requests.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) AI-driven threat detection and prevention capabilities have helped my organization by providing more precise detection and response. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) has improved my ability to discover, monitor, and protect APIs by automatically mapping undocumented API endpoints, ingesting OpenAPI specifications, and enforcing strict schema validation to prevent parameter tampering and logic abuse. This is achieved through automated API discovery and protection. In terms of AI, it evaluates requests against learned behavioral baselines rather than static RegEx signatures, effectively stopping zero-day exploits while drastically minimizing false positives.
What needs improvement?
There should be more tutorials and documentation about the usage of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) online so more users and tenants can use these security services daily, as it is not as well-documented as other tools, such as the F5 WAF.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) scalability is impressive as it prevents the bottleneck common in traditional centralized WAF appliances and ensures the security throughput grows proportionally alongside application workloads. I do not see any bottlenecks, as it scales through a stateless micro-agent architecture that decouples traffic handling from control plane management.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I purchased Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) through the AWS Marketplace.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment and ongoing management of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) were easy.
What was our ROI?
I have not seen a return on investment, as I still have the same number of employees and the same amount of effort and time in hours.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is that it is a bit expensive.
What other advice do I have?
Nothing would make Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) closer to a 10 for me since a 10 would mean preventing against all attacks, which is why it cannot receive that rating; nothing can prevent every attack.
I would advise others looking into using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) to take an evaluation license and try it first to understand how it works, and then try it again to form a final opinion about whether they are going to purchase it. This way, they can see if it fits within their current setup. I would rate this product an 8 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Secure filtering and application control have protected web workloads and simplified deployment
What is our primary use case?
I have found features like Cisco ASA and Firepower most valuable. Secure Firewall is a secure firewall with features like WAF and web applications. We have web filtering applications, secure features, and application controls among other features.
What is most valuable?
I have found features like Cisco ASA and Firepower most valuable. Secure Firewall is a secure firewall with features like WAF and web applications. We have web filtering applications, secure features, and application controls among other features. I am not using Cisco SecureX with Secure Firewall.
What needs improvement?
Currently, I have no suggestions for Cisco Secure Firewall. I am not working on the next-generation firewall of Cisco. As I already mentioned, I have no suggestions regarding the features and improvements. I am not working on Cisco firewall currently.
For how long have I used the solution?
Overall, I have been working with Cisco Secure Firewall for almost three to four years.
How are customer service and support?
I would rate the technical support by Cisco a nine out of ten.
How was the initial setup?
I think the implementation is easy. GUI-based implementation for firewalls is straightforward. Although the command line is a very simple process, next-generation firewalls now come with GUI-based interfaces.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
In comparison to other vendors, the pricing is reasonable and affordable.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I am currently using some Cisco products. I am currently using some switches of Cisco. I am working on the ASA series. I stopped working with Cisco Firewall more than one to two years ago. I am currently dealing mostly with other Cisco products. I am not dealing with Cisco Secure Access or Cisco Duo. I am working with different product vendors such as Check Point and Fortinet. I am working with Check Point Web Application Firewalls and using bundles with them. I am using some features such as WAF and UTP bundles with application controls, web filtering, email filtering, and DNS filtering and controls that are implemented with UTP enterprise bundles and other WAF applications. I have been dealing with Check Point for three to four years on different products. I am using other platforms and testing some things for the networks. I am also using some other products with them.
What other advice do I have?
I did not have new features or functionalities that I have used recently in Secure Firewall. Check Point WAF is used in my company and my customers are using it. I have seen measurable business and security outcomes since implementation of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). All vendors design firewalls with application filtering. As per current incident reporting, we implement and update our feature updates and security databases. These databases are updated regularly. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) works fine for every product like Cisco, Check Point, Fortinet, and Palo Alto. I am currently not using Check Point WAF as a primary solution, just for a specific purpose. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is working fine and reports, detects, and stops attacks such as IPS and detection. I would rate Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) a nine out of ten. The existing features are working fine, but new day-to-day attacks and issues arise in the environment globally, dealing with attacks such as phishing and DDoS attacks daily. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) could improve by addressing the new day-to-day attacks and issues that arise in the environment and globally dealing with attacks. I have been satisfied with pricing, technical support, and performance. I am a customer of Check Point. I have been working in this field for several years. My overall review rating for this product is ten.
Application security has reduced incidents and now needs UI fixes and shared exception rules
What is our primary use case?
We have implemented Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) in our environment. We have been dealing with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for three months. We are using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for our company only.
Currently, we are handling only the L7 part with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), and we are planning to expand to the APIs and rate-limiting capabilities. We are not handling the network part, as we are only taking care of the security part with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
We have a team of 15 people who handle Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) and other security aspects. We have only two administrators dedicated to Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
What is most valuable?
We have seen measurable business and security outcomes since implementation. We have observed reduced incidents with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) has helped us reduce our false positives rate. Compared to other WAF solutions, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is user-friendly and very visible. When we review incidents with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), it is clearly visible where the block occurred and it shows us detailed overview of the incident. In other products, I am not able to get the exact reason for the block, so I can identify where the block happened, and it is very user-friendly for me to add the policy or explicit policy there.
What needs improvement?
I face issues with the UI part of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), as it malfunctions sometimes. Sometimes I do not see the icons in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), and whenever I refresh the page, the icons remain invisible.
Additional features I have considered with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) include the ability to add an exception rule. Since we have multiple projects, I want to add an exception rule to all projects as a shared exception, but when adding it, I am unable to add it individually.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working in this field for three years.
How are customer service and support?
When I raise any TAC ticket for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), I am satisfied with their points and their support, as I am receiving immediate responses from the TAC. I can easily rate their support for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) an eight out of ten.
An incident occurred regarding the Global Accelerator movement from CloudFront to Global Accelerator, and for that, it took one week to respond, which was delayed by five days.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We considered the F5 WAF, Edge, and Radware before finally choosing Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
How was the initial setup?
Compared to others, it was very easy for us to onboard Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) application.
What about the implementation team?
We received nice support from the OEM for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), so they guided us, and we completed it within a week, onboarding one full project.
What other advice do I have?
The main reason why I chose Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is about the cost, and we have a Check Point firewall and we also use endpoint security and email security, so we wanted to choose this as a one-stop solution.
I do not have an idea regarding Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)'s ability for preemptively blocking zero-day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies, as it has been only three months, so we are yet to explore things in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). Currently, we did not check the AI-driven threat detection and prevention capabilities in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). Are you referring to the Gen AI or the built-in part of the WAF?
Regarding the built-in AI-driven threat detection and prevention capabilities, I do not see any false positive detection based on the AI part in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), so everything we are receiving is accurate results only. Based on that learning part, when Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is in learning mode, the learning part is very helpful for us to filter those things, so after moving it to blocking, we are not receiving any false positive alerts or incidents. If I want to add an exception in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), I can either add it in the shared one or in a local one.
I have given this review an overall rating of 7.5 out of 10.
Ai-driven cloud security has strengthened threat prevention and improved security posture
What is our primary use case?
The main purpose is to have network security through machine learning, which can offer threat detection and intelligence for my endpoints, and I am looking for application security.
I am looking for an AI-based solution that can strengthen my cloud-native security, automate security, and better prevent threats.
I am looking for an AI-based solution and unified cloud-native security from the SaaS platform to improve my security posture.
What is most valuable?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a SaaS platform that gives unified cloud-native security across my applications, workloads, and network, allowing me to automate security, prevent threats, ensure compliance, and manage my security posture well across all my cloud environments.
It conducts security scoring and risk scoring, which helps prioritize my security needs, and the advanced threat detection is also very fine, providing actionable information for my current security threats by collecting and analyzing data through threat actors and IOCs, offering tactical, technical, and operational features.
What needs improvement?
The false positive rate is a concern, but I could recommend improvements where false positives have to be minimized better.
This all depends on how the rules are customized and configured, and it can also improve with planning during the initial configuration, including threat intelligence and APIs, so it could enhance how it defends against attacks and prompts injections.
It can find the threat actors behind it, and I find that strategically and technically it is effective, although the AI-related features could improve, especially as global AI capabilities evolve, which are advancing more than what Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) provides compared to competitors.
There are no glitches; I believe improvement could be made primarily in API Gateway and API security, especially by enabling enhanced AI-related features for better fine-tuning.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have experience of two years with the product.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is definitely a highly scalable solution without any doubt.
How are customer service and support?
The customer support is very good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Earlier, we had Microsoft Defender, which we replaced with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), and we are now ensuring that policy enforcement and threat protection are better.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment and initial setup are really straightforward; they provide enough documentation, videos, and deployment documents that are really helpful to complete it faster.
What was our ROI?
The return on investment is very good as it has increased my security posture and the operational efficiency of my engineers.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It is a little bit expensive, but the pricing model is acceptable, though a reduction would make it more competitive with leaders such as Palo Alto.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I purchased from a different source.
What other advice do I have?
The configurations are pretty easy, and it is plug-and-play, which gives me regular updates.
I would assess the solution as positive in this regard.
All the integrations are pretty easy through API connectivity, which I can recommend more, and it also helps with modern AI-based vulnerabilities to conduct token tests and improve detection.
I would rate this review a 9 out of 10.
AI-driven protection has strengthened our API security and reduced successful web attacks
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
I believe AI-driven threat detection and prevention capabilities help in identifying, blocking, and responding to application threats more effectively. The AI helps in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) because it creates a targeted exclusion list based on its learning period. It can detect and stop or prevent threats based on context tuning and historical data.
What needs improvement?
For how long have I used the solution?
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
How are customer service and support?
How was the initial setup?
What other advice do I have?
Despite the complex nature and high price, I think the product is worth buying because it is effective. The configuration is complex, so it is not as easy as with other products. However, I believe it is worth the investment because the security is excellent. For security, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a leader without a doubt. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a very good, highly secure enterprise-level product, but it does have limitations, including the price and the need for trained personnel. I also encounter many errors during HA mode configuration, which can be tricky. I have a hybrid model for deployment. I would rate this review an eight overall.
Cloud-native protection has secured our web workloads and simplifies autonomous threat defense
What is our primary use case?
I typically use Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for protecting cloud workspaces, which includes cloud applications and websites hosted on cloud platforms, especially Amazon or Azure. My customers are using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) as a standalone product in the cloud, not in conjunction with any other Check Point products.
What is most valuable?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is especially valuable because of its cloud-native architecture and AI autonomous protection capabilities. It does not require extensive administrative skills or experience to operate. Within minutes of redirection, the platform can be up and running, which is one of the key benefits of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
Traditional WAF solutions require rule tuning with manual updates, but Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) includes a self-learning tool that suggests changes automatically. This significantly reduces the need for manual interruption and administrative effort.
Stability is one of the unique features of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). I do not have any concerns regarding hardware or security stability, with a reliability rating of 99.9%.
What needs improvement?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) needs to offer more competitive pricing. There are many other cloud WAF products available, and when comparing costs, other vendors have a significant cost advantage.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) pricing is not as competitive as other original equipment manufacturers like Cloudflare or Array WAF. I feel the pricing is on the higher side compared to these alternatives.
Application Delivery Controller (ADC) features are limited in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). While we can integrate with ADC, not all inputs from the forest can be uploaded to Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), which is a practical issue we have encountered in customer use cases.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for approximately one and a half years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Stability is one of the unique features of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). I do not have any concerns regarding hardware or security stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
On a cloud platform, I do not foresee any scalability limitations. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) has explicitly expandable features, so I do not forecast any constraints.
How are customer service and support?
I am satisfied with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) customer support. They have a dedicated Tactics and Operations Center (TAC) team with service level agreements in place. We typically receive business hours or 24/7 support depending on our license level.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have not deployed Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) on-premises because their capital expenditure cost is significantly higher than other brands. I have not had the opportunity to deploy an on-premises solution from Check Point.
How was the initial setup?
The biggest advantage of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is that it is a cloud-native platform. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is competitive with other original equipment manufacturers. I am not mentioning low-range products, but when compared with offerings from Cloudflare or Array WAF, I feel Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) pricing is on the higher side.
What about the implementation team?
Application Delivery Controller (ADC) features are limited in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). We can integrate with ADC, but not all inputs from the forest can be uploaded to Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). This is a practical issue we have encountered in customer use cases.
What was our ROI?
From my experience and client experience, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a good product for cost of ownership and return on investment.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) offers a subscription-based, pay-as-you-use model with monthly or yearly subscription options. This subscription model helps customers manage their costs as an operational expenditure rather than a capital expenditure.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
All original equipment manufacturers mention zero-day attacks and the exploitation of previously unknown vulnerabilities, and Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) also includes this feature. As a tool, it is good, but I did not observe any extraordinary service from Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) regarding zero-day attack protection. It is a good feature, but I did not find particularly unique characteristics.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Application Delivery Controller (ADC) features are limited in Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). We can integrate with ADC, but not all inputs from the forest can be uploaded to Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). This is a practical issue we have encountered in customer use cases.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) does have higher ratings in some areas.
What other advice do I have?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a good product for total cost of ownership and return on investment. From my experience and client experience, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) offers a subscription-based, pay-as-you-use model with monthly or yearly subscription options. This subscription model helps customers manage their costs as an operational expenditure rather than a capital expenditure. I would rate this product overall as a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Security has improved for cloud-native apps and now protects APIs with low latency and minimal tuning
What is our primary use case?
Any cloud-native application is where my clients might be using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) to secure Layer 7 with low latency. It is one of the best in Layer 7 security.
What is most valuable?
The biggest advantages of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) are that it is lightweight and the integration into cloud-native applications is very easy. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) produces false positives that are minimal. It has a learning process that is unique, adopting an education model approach. Ease of deployment and efficiency, particularly for API security, are phenomenal. The console is key, with Infinity Portal offering access to all kinds of Check Point products and a unique dashboard and reporting system.
Scaling is easy; once deployed, it takes care of everything without causing any concern for improving hardware or configurations. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) reduces total cost of ownership, being cheaper compared to any other software.
What needs improvement?
As a reseller, the most difficult part is the lack of awareness. Check Point does not provide any kind of awareness programs to the customers, requiring partners to educate customers.
There are indeed some features missing, particularly connected with integration or with artificial intelligence. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) faces certain issues with dual ISP tagging on entry-level devices since SD-WAN features were added.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been selling Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for almost three to four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Regarding stability, I am not finding any issues; it is very stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is very easy to scale. Once deployed, you forget it; it takes care of everything.
How are customer service and support?
My impression of technical support for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is that it is adequate. The technical support team is really good.
If I were to rate support from zero to ten points, I would give them a ten, as they are the best.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is good; there are no questions asked.
What was our ROI?
In terms of pricing, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is not expensive; it is worth the investment. If there is no downtime or bottlenecks while accessing your application from the internet, that itself is the return on investment.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I can tell you specific issues or advantages with products such as FortiGate or Check Point perimeter firewall.
What other advice do I have?
From a technical perspective, I do not think Check Point is leading in the web application firewall space. Cloudflare, F5, and Barracuda WAFs are noteworthy. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) can be configured with no prior training.
When I compare Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) with traditional WAFs, I find its learning curve to be simple.
Check Point has an excellent intelligence engine for zero-day attacks, unmatched by Palo Alto. I would rate this review a ten overall.
Unified security has reduced alert fatigue and improved zero-day protection for our applications
What is our primary use case?
The customers I have worked with were primarily using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) as an application security solution, mostly leveraging Check Point CloudGuard for various purposes such as protecting their application servers from the top 10 OWASP attacks and for Zero-Day protection.
My clients were not working separately with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF); they were receiving a unified platform that included firewall, email security, and endpoint security, so the integration effectively eliminated silos in their environment.
What is most valuable?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) was valuable primarily because the data center was in Dubai, making it convenient for customers in the region, and the user interface was really helpful and easy to understand.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) helps my clients reduce total cost of ownership, and the return on investment was really high for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), and it was the only product with GenAI security features compared to other WAF products.
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) provides benefits such as reduction in alert fatigue with fewer false positives, Zero-Day protection, and the introduction of GenAI LLM features that customers really appreciate.
What needs improvement?
A gap for improvement for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is the learning curve, as better training modules could help end customers, and pricing and reporting functionality could also be improved.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for almost two years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I can rate stability at approximately 8.5.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I can say scalability is a 9.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support is rated at 10.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I am currently working with Palo Alto as the product I replaced Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) with. I totally moved to Palo Alto from Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF).
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is simple; it is not that complex as long as a customer has a basic understanding of how WAF works.
Deployment was really easy for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF); it does not have any complex deployment requirements.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Barracuda is the main competitor of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), along with Fortinet, but Barracuda excels in application security and is doing great in this space.
What other advice do I have?
No product can provide 100% protection, but Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) uses multi-method protection with AI machine learning to detect abnormalities, alongside features like ThreatCloud for real-time analysis of potential zero-day threats. I will highly recommend Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) to other users. I have given this review an overall rating of 8.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Security has improved for critical web services and supports complex protection needs
What is our primary use case?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is required by customers who have web resources and assets that are important to them and in production. These resources include internet shops, services, and financial services. Without a web application firewall, the business stops, and customers need to implement this solution. Insurance companies, banks, and similar organizations fall into this category.
What is most valuable?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is easy to deploy and provides a complete solution.
Check Point's approach differs from others because it uses artificial intelligence elements and an AI-based approach. The WAF solution operates as a complex solution with multiple functionalities rather than a simple one.
The solution helps reduce the false positive rate. Productivity shows that only 10 to 25 percent will be false positives.
What needs improvement?
The interface and deployment require qualified skills and a qualified engineer who knows this product very well.
In general, Check Point products load the system somewhat and require more performance and better performance equipment on the customer side.
When compared to solutions specialized only on WAF, such as Imperva or Cloudflare, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a lighter version and does not have as well-performed a load balancer or anti-DDoS option.
For how long have I used the solution?
We started using Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) two years ago.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) scores eight to nine points on a ten-point scale for scalability. This scalability is one of the top features of Check Point solutions in general and especially for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF). It is a main approach of the Check Point team.
How are customer service and support?
I cannot be objective in this question because we have our own service team with engineers on our staff. We handle most tickets and cases ourselves.
What about the implementation team?
We operate as a partner company in projects and serve as an integrator for different solutions, including security solutions.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Regarding total cost of ownership, I cannot describe this accurately. Concerning the price for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) and license costs, the pricing is good, and the approach could be better.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Regarding competitors, Cloudflare is the most popular and best-selling solution on the Ukrainian market now, and this trend will continue.
What other advice do I have?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) and more Check Point solutions are oriented toward cloud infrastructure, cloud, or hybrid infrastructure. I would give Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) an overall rating of nine points.