I am using not only Fortinet, but I am also dealing with other vendors as well, such as Check Point. I am working with email security by Check Point. I have a little bit of experience with Check Point CloudGuard WAF, as we ran a proof of concept here.
CloudGuard WAF-as-a-Service (Premium, PAYG, Free 7 Days or 1M Requests)
Check Point Software TechnologiesExternal reviews
82 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Web protection has simplified basic rule setup but still needs better multi-site flexibility
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The efficiency improvements provided by Check Point CloudGuard WAF are something I can describe. It was fairly easy to set up Check Point CloudGuard WAF if you are looking at the basic configuration. It was pretty acceptable with setting up rules, and so forth. If you were looking for advanced configurations, then you had to go for a different setup, and that made it a little bit complicated.
In terms of efficiency, Check Point CloudGuard WAF is very straightforward to set up rules because you really do not need to do much customization, as it is the case with all Cloud WAFs.
I have been familiar with Check Point CloudGuard WAF for about six months.
What needs improvement?
Check Point could improve or add more flexibility when it comes to migrating to different sites. Multi-tenancy is an area where Check Point has room for improvement.
How are customer service and support?
From what I saw, the customer support by Check Point was pretty good, but they were trying to sell it to us, so I would rate it eight out of ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have experience with FortiWeb, although we just stopped using them. We used to have FortiWeb for the last few years, but now we have actually stopped using them.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
The price of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is not expensive, as it was the cheapest solution we found. There is good competition for Check Point CloudGuard WAF at the moment, with big players in the market.
What other advice do I have?
If we selected Check Point CloudGuard WAF, which we did not, it would certainly be much cheaper. I would recommend Check Point CloudGuard WAF to others at a rating of seven out of ten. I would recommend it if you have a simple setup, then it is cheaper and it does the job. My overall review rating for Check Point CloudGuard WAF is seven out of ten.
Strong ML-Based Protection, but Pricing, Setup, and Documentation Need Work
What do you like best about the product?
It can easily distinguish between attacks and legitimate traffic. It doesn’t require a lot of manual tuning, such as creating rules and policies. It protects using machine learning and AI, which helps prevent most attacks.
What do you dislike about the product?
I don’t like the pricing and the complexity of the initial setup. Log retention is limited, which creates issues with troubleshooting, and the documentation feels lacking—especially when it comes to real-world examples.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
It protects against SQL injection and XSS attacks that are often missed. It also reduces false positives, which means less overhead for the network security team. It helps stop automated botnets as well. Overall, it strengthens our network security.
Strong Security Features, but Setup and Management Can Be Challenging
What do you like best about the product?
I have been using the product for some time now, and I can honestly say it is highly effective against SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and bot threats. The automated rules make configuration appear very straightforward and simple.
What do you dislike about the product?
Configuring the system correctly requires a significant investment of time and a certain level of expertise, particularly when it comes to adjusting security rules to minimize false positives. Additionally, managing and reviewing policies can be somewhat cumbersome, as the interface is not always intuitive, especially when working with complex rule configurations or analyzing large volumes of traffic logs.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
As I have mentioned above the product is highly effective against SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and bot threats. The automated rules make configuration appear very straightforward and simple.
Protects against threats and reduces cost of ownership but needs some integration improvements
What is our primary use case?
I have dealt with a very complex situation. We are fortunate to have a global presence in 98 countries. We have about 400 people working worldwide.
Our challenge is to support our customers and protect our infrastructure, which is quite different from normal ones. Unlike a typical company that centralizes everything in a data center, we work in countries with strict legal restrictions. This requires us to create a separate infrastructure for each country. I need something to support us and provide compliance.
How has it helped my organization?
I am a very exposed company, and this solution helps prevent attacks.
What is most valuable?
I have thousands of exposed websites and APIs. Being able to control what is happening and try to prevent any attack is the best feature.
I provide gamification, and if one wants to acquire services like Netflix, they can go through my application. Some people try to find tokens to sell on the black market; however, with the WAF, I'm able to understand what's happening and block it in real-time.
It's important to protect against threats without relying on signatures. If it sees any anomaly, it just blocks it.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helps guard against zero-day attacks. Luckily, we haven't had any.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%. We have everything centralized and we can configure everything centrally.
We've been able to reduce our false positive rate by 80%. It's easier to have something automated instead of a person working on this, checking everything.
What needs improvement?
I'm not sure what can be improved. I don't manage the solution. It seems to be a product that runs all the time. They might be able to add more integrations. Security could always be improved. Overall, it's very good.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have used the solution for the last three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would give stability a nine out of ten for sure. It is very stable. As an evolved product, there are always areas to mature, of course, however, it provides a very good and mature experience.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I enjoy it the scalability. I can scale up or down based on workload, so I'm very fortunate with that.
How are customer service and support?
I have a great partnership with Check Point. I know a lot of people who work there. For me, it's a very positive and beneficial relationship.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I did not use any previous solutions.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was very intuitive. I had minor issues, however, that was due to not reading the documentation properly. Overall, it was a very satisfying and straightforward experience.
What about the implementation team?
I did the implementation by myself, however, I have a partner as well. They can do things first; however, I managed it on my own since it was easy to do.
What was our ROI?
We have yet to see an ROI.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
For me, the pricing and licensing is a fair value for what they provide.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I did not consider alternate solutions. This was included in my subscription. I have a full suite of Check Point products, so I just use this.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. I'm not the one managing it. From what I've heard about the challenges we face, I would rate it a seven. In one project, we had to use mutual certificates, and it wasn't the best experience to configure. It is doable, however, it can be improved. This causes some issues for our customers.
If someone is only using a cloud-native option WAF, they are missing out on agility. We're more agile since we can protect everything we have. And multi-cloud is a real thing. Everyone has multiple clouds, so centralizing everything into one place is the greatest, in my opinion.
Has AI feature which makes operations easy but technical support needs improvement
What is our primary use case?
I use the solution for securing web applications.
What is most valuable?
The tool's most valuable feature is AI, which makes operations easier. Moreover, it is easy to deploy.
Securing web applications with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security is easy. The setup and configuration are easy compared to alternatives. It stands out for its simplicity. It does not rely on signatures, one of its unique features.
The solution helps to reduce TCO. It minimizes the pressure.
What needs improvement?
I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features.
How was the initial setup?
Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's deployment is easy.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market.
What other advice do I have?
The tool protects newer applications. It isn't very good when dealing with both applications. However, it is expected. I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.
showing 1 - 5