
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)
Strong Protection with Room for Onboarding Improvement
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?
Low False Positives and an Easy Setup from Day One
Great UI, Smooth Integration, and Helpful Support
Strong Security and Easy Management for Multi-Cloud App Protection
Efficient Threat Management, Tough Learning Curve
Check Point WAF Delivers Strong Protection Against Common Web Attacks
Easy to Use, Affordable, and Accessible for New Users
Strong Web Protection with Easy Management
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.