Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) Reviews

1. Visibility for cloud workloads, including server, serverless and Kubernetes.
2. Security configuration review along with automatic remediation.
3. Posture management and compliance for a complete cloud environment.
4. Centralize visibility for a complete cloud environment of the workload hosted on multiple cloud platforms (AWS and Azure).
5. Baseline for security policy as per the workload based on services, such as S3, EC2, etc.
6. Visibility of an API call within the environment.
7. IAM management providing access to the cloud network in a controlled manner.
8. Alerts and notifications for any security breach/changes in the cloud environment.
9. Flow visibility of traffic to and from the cloud environment.
10. Real-time alerting for any security incidents.

They provide support for Azure, Amazon, GCP, and Alibaba. However, we just have AWS and Azure.

1. Provides complete visibility of the workload hosted on different cloud platforms (AWS and Azure) along with multiple tenants. 
2. Helps in enhancing security for cloud environments by providing reports, both in terms of security and compliance. 
3. Provides complete visibility of traffic flowing to/from the cloud platform.
4. Provides best practice policy that helps to strengthen the security of the workload.
5. Assets inventory and API calls can happen from the cloud.
6. Provides control in terms of accessing the cloud workload. As a policy is created, this will block direct access to the cloud environment in case the same is not define or approved in Dome9.

Security visibility with Dome9 is excellent. Normally, without this type of solution, especially if you have some workloads hosted on Azure, they give you minimal tools to be able to analyze the loss. There are different consoles that need to be checked for analyzing any incident. In the case of Dome9, it gives you the loss provided in a report on a centralized console. It gives you complete visibility, including the IP to IP Flow, which is happening from the workloads to the Internet or the Internet to the workloads. Even in case of getting a threat intelligence from Check Point, which we have the integration, if some workflows are communicating any suspicious IPs, then the reports are available on the flow logs. On top of that, it also provides a report where you will be able to find out from which location or country you are getting the traffic to your workloads. Therefore, if you want to block certain geo-locations from communicating with your network, then you can also do that using Dome9.

The workload, which was taking a day's time, now can be turned out within hours. We are able to analyze the logs in real-time. Previously, if we enabled some services, then the email needed to be sent to the security team who would do the scanning, might submit the reports, and post some action to be taken by the developers. Using this solution, we are getting the reports in real-time. The remediation can also be applied automatically. The developer can take the necessary action immediately. It provides us what action needs to be taken.

Unless we did some scanning, we used to not know that there were security flaws within particular services. However, by using Dome9, as it has complete visibility, we are getting those details much faster.

The firewall normally has been managed by security team. Admins can bypass through firewall to create any policy. They can go outside and downloading/uploading anything from their workloads. This solution provides that control as well.

1. The IAM role gives us complete control over the cloud environment. In case someone tries to bypass and create a user or policy locally, which is not allowed or defined in Dome9, changes will be rolled back and a notification will be sent to the concerned team.
2. It's always ON and available on a mobile device using the app.
3. There is complete visibility of the traffic flow with threat intelligence provided from Check Point. It even provides communication detail on any suspicious IPs.
4. Provides detailed information if some workload tries to directly access and bypass any firewall policy.
5. Provides a granular level of reports along with issues based on compliance standards, which are defined depending upon organizational requirements.
6. Task delegation as a particular incident can be assigned to a particular individual. The same can also be done manually or automatically.
7. Customizes queries for detecting any incident.

The solution is pretty straightforward to use, as it is only a SaaS model. You just need to enable the accounts for which Dome9 needs to do validation, and that's it.

Compliance checking capabilities: When you enroll your account, we have multiple accounts. Once you enter that on Dome9, it does a complete scan of your account based on these flow logs. It checks: "What are the security flaws?" So, the compliance depends on the company and what they are using as a benchmark. Normally, for India, we use the CIS as a benchmark, then whatever flow logs are available, those are provided in the reports. Then, we check those compliance reports against the CIS benchmark, and accordingly, take actions. We can then know what are the deviation on the cloud platform and on the account, with respect to the CIS.

There are some use cases where you will not have reports readily available or not get the dashboard for particular outputs. You can create a query on the console for those, e.g., if a particular EXE file started on a workload, we can find out if that is running anywhere in the cloud. While it does not provide details on the process level, it will provide us with which sensor is communicating to which IP addresses as well as if there are any deviations from that pattern.

It has remediation capabilities, and there are two options available:

1. You can do automatic remediation, where you need to define the policy for which unit that you are doing remediation. 
2. It can be assigned to a particular team or group of people for its particular vulnerabilities of security flaws. That ticket can then be raised to service quotas be remediated manually.

1. Policy validation should be available before it is deployed in a production environment using a cloud template.
2. Automatic remediation requires read/write access. When providing read/write access to third-party applications, this can add risk. It should have some options of triggering API calls to the cloud platform, which in turn, can make the required changes.
3. A number of security rules need to be added in order to identify more issues. 
4. The reporting should have more options. The reports should be more granular.
5. It should support all container platforms for visibility of a complete infrastructure single console, such as, PCF.

Three months.

Until now, we have not faced any issues in term of downtime or outages. It seems to be quite stable.

Scalability is not an issue. There are a number of workload licenses that need to be procured, then it is straightforward.

There are between eight to 10 security admins and auditors who have access to Dome9.

Our complete cloud workload is managed through Dome9.

The support is excellent. They regularly review our cloud infrastructure and provide suggestions to help us have a better security posture.

Initially, we were using tools provided by the service provider, such as, ScoutSuite, AWS Config Rules, AWS Trusted Advisor, or Amazon GuardDuty for monitoring, and similar tools for Azure as well. Then, we needed to go through a different console to identify any incidents.

Initially, we used submit a report, but there was no remediation nor information provided how to remediate workload issues. In our current scenarios, we are able to get the complete visibility. The complete visibility of the solution has been a key to the increase in our productivity.

The initial setup was straightforward. The only thing that was required from our side was a cloud template, which was provided by Dome9. We need to executed that template in our cloud environment for AWS and Azure. It automatically creates a read-only ID on the AWS platform for Dome9 to connect with. There is some configuration which needs to be done on Dome9 as well as AWS, but the deployment takes around 15 to 30 minutes.

Check Point's team was available, but we implemented it in-house with our support team.

We don't require staff for deployment and maintenance of this solution.

As it is a security product, the ROI will not have that much importance because it is enhancing your security and/or providing more security to your infrastructure. If there are any security incidents, then Dome9 is able to protect us.

Initially, once the solution was deployed into production, then the scanning used to happen and we used to see the environment's visibility. In the current situation, as everyone is moving to the DevOps environment and using the CI/CD pipelines, it helps us to analyze vulnerabilities way before they get installed in production and the web. It gives us more security in the production environment.

The licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads (number of instances) within one license with no additional nor hidden charges. If you want to have 200 workloads under Dome9, then you need to take out two licenses for that. Also, it does not have any impact on cloud billing, as data is shared using the API call. This is well within the limit of free API calls provided by the cloud provider.

We evaluated Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Micro Cloud One Conformity.

Normally, the policies are accessible only on the browsers, e.g., if you compile them from Prisma Cloud, they're available as a part of a browser. However, for management users, especially for CIOs and CTOs, it becomes difficult for them to type URLs, then login. In the case of Dome9, they provide an app. With that app, you can directly login with single sign-on. It is much easier to access using the app compared to the browser option.

Most things are the same for all three providers. The major difference between Dome9 and Prisma is the IAM roles. The maturity of IAM roles available in Dome9 are much better than the other two solutions. Currently, our focus is mostly on what is happening and who is making the changes in the environment. Another thing is the visibility that Dome9 provides through its intel is better than the other two solutions.

The other two solutions have system capabilities better than Check Point.

I would recommend Prisma as well as Dome9 because they both have the visibility. In our case, the IAM was a critical piece of our requirements.

The cloud and on-prem environments are completely two different networks.

They should offer the cloud in India. Soon, there will be GDPR and India will have its own data protection laws. This might create some issues in the case of the data residing outside India. Because we are collecting metadata from the internal networks for the cloud environment, this is the reason that I suggest that they should have some plans to have the cloud in India. However, neither Prisma nor Trend Micro have cloud in India.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of 10.

1) Visibility for Cloud Work Load for Server, Server Less & Container environment 

2) Security configuration review along with auto-remediation

3) Posture management and Compliance for complete Cloud Environment

4) Centralize Visibility for Complete Cloud Environment of Workload hosted on Multiple Cloud Platform (AWS, Azure, and GCP)

5) The baseline for Security Policy as per Workload based on Services such as S3, EC2, etc

6) Visibility of API call within the environment

7) IAM management providing access to cloud network in a control manner

8) Alert and Notification for any Security breach/Changes in Cloud environment

9) Flow Visibility of traffic from and to Cloud Environment

10) Real-time alerting for any incident 

1) Provides visibility of organization complete cloud infra hosted on different cloud platforms such as AWS & Azure. It also provides visibility of different accounts hosted on multiple tenants on a single dashboard.

2) Provide visibility of workload with an average instance running on a daily basis. As we have few instances that are taken offline during nonworking hours

3) It provides access to complete Cloud environment in control manner, Admin is not allowed to create or add any user or change security Policy directly with an admin account, unless the same has been approved via IAM role

4) Provides compliance and vulnerability detail of our environment. It also provides auto-remediation for few policies.

5) It has helped us to create a baseline while enabling any services.

6) Provides complete detail of any workload trying or getting connected to the Internet or if some workload is getting bypass from Firewall Policy.

7) Provides end to end visibility of source and detail IP address along with communication detail.

8) Reports generated based on metadata and API calls hence it does not impact our billing cycle 

1) IAM role is the feature which is widely used as it provides a granular level of control and visibility of any changes happening within our Cloud network

2) Benchmark of our network

3) Complaisance and reporting to understand and mitigate any security issue 

4) Threat intel integration which provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with Suspicious or blacklisted IP

5) Centralize dashboard for different tenant and account 

6) Assets Management as it provide complete visibility of our workload inkling EC2 instance or Serverless 

1) More number of Security Policy to have more number of detection 

2) It should capture more information in metadata including communication detail. Also, Internal IP addresses should not be tracked as this might be having some compliance issues. 

3) Should have support for VMware Pivotal Cloud Foundry

4) Should maintain  configuration information which will help in case forensic need to be performed in term of changes

5) Should allow Policy to be deployed using a template and the same should be getting reviewed before deployment. This will help us to provide secure deployment CI/CD

We have been using Dome9 for three months.

we have workout for SaaS offering from Dome9 hence entire setup is managed and maintained by Dome9. We have enrolled our account and using it as a service and till not we have not observed any outages 

As it's available as SaaS and subscription offering it can be scalable deepening upon the number of workloads for which support is required.

Overall its excellent both support and presales team.

We used a Cloud-native solution to identify security issues but it did not provide any detailed visibility. Also, multiple console access where required in order to identify and security flaw.

It was straightforward there was template provided by Dome9 (Checkpoint) and that need to be imported in our account which create ID and provide access to Dome9 on our cloud infra to monitor and collect metadata logs

Our cloud team has helped us in terms of implementation. Also, it's not complicated the complete step by step guide is provided by Dome9 (CheckPoint) for enrolling Cloud to Dome9.

Cost is based on number or Workload in case of Prisma & Dome9 

For Aquasec it's based on a number of application workloads

For Conformity it's based on the number of accounts 

Redlock from Prisma 

Conformity from Trend Micro

Auquasec 

Licensing should be based on workload and should have some option for smaller brackets its should not in starting from 100,200 etc.

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. 

I use it for cloud visibility detection and remediation. I also use it for reporting and dashboarding.

The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its compliance engine and auto-remediation features.

CloudGuard CNAPP is a great tool that justifies its investment. Like any other tool, there are opportunities for improvement that can be addressed through a roadmap.

I have been using Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP for six years.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as a ten out of ten.

I would rate the technical support as seven out of ten. It is good when we get attention, but sometimes it is a bit difficult to get the attention we need.

Neutral

We opted for CloudGuard CNAPP over other solutions mostly due to its flexibility.

The implementation of the solution was easy.

There has been a significant ROI for me because now I can reduce risks effectively, and every risk I mitigate is a return on investment for the platform.

CloudGuard CNAPP has been crucial in giving us visibility into our cloud setup and has significantly lowered our risks by enabling better control over our cloud security.

I find that CloudGuard CNAPP 's cloud security posture management is exceptional for addressing both physical and digital security concerns. It offers extensive coverage and provides a straightforward yet sophisticated method for creating and implementing new security queries.

My advice would be to define your use cases very well when considering this solution.

Overall, I would rate CloudGuard CNAPP as an eight out of ten.

I use CloudGuard Network Security to enhance our cloud exchange points' security. Our customers can seamlessly connect across multiple clouds within the region, and CloudGuard provides next-generation firewall services to ensure their data and applications are protected.

CloudGuard Network Security has significantly improved our organization by helping us tap into the Check Point customer market.

The VPN features in CloudGuard Network Security have been the most valuable for us. It allows us to scale securely within our infrastructure, providing both strong security and VPN capabilities.

In the next release, including VRF support would be highly beneficial. Many customers have been requesting this feature, as it is currently lacking in Check Point's offerings, which can make architectural designs more cumbersome compared to competitors.

I have been working with CloudGuard Network Security for two and a half years.

As for scalability, it could be even better with VRF support, as it would allow for more efficient scaling without the need to deploy separate firewalls for different workloads.

CloudGuard Network Security has been quite stable.

I would rate technical support for CloudGuard as an eight out of ten.To make it a ten, I would expect more proactive assistance and smoother transitions between support levels.

Positive

When comparing CloudGuard Network Security to other solutions like Fortinet and Palo Alto Firewalls, they are similar in terms of identifying security threats. They all offer robust features such as antivirus, deep packet inspection, and IPS. Some of our customers have transitioned from Palo Alto to Check Point. While I don't have specific reasons, it could be related to factors like pricing.

We deployed it across multiple locations, utilizing AWS for SMS management. The environment was designed to ensure security and privacy, with all deployments being private despite being in the public cloud. Our implementation strategy was flexible, depending on the customer's needs, focusing on workload security first and then gradually migrating workloads. The initial deployment was straightforward.

One significant difference between CloudGuard Network Security and other solutions is the lack of VRF support. This means that when dealing with customers who have multiple segments and exchange points, deploying new firewalls becomes necessary. Competitors' solutions typically include VRF support, making scaling much easier and eliminating the need for additional firewall purchases.

We chose CloudGuard over other vendors because it allows us to provide unified security across multiple cloud providers like AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. Unlike native cloud firewalls, CloudGuard offers scalability and the ability to expand across different platforms, meeting our customers' needs for consistent security across diverse cloud environments.

We implemented CloudGuard Network Security to meet our customers' demands for enhanced security features and centralized management. They specifically requested Check Point CloudGuard for its robust capabilities, including SMS and MDS for global management.

Using CloudGuard Duo Security has provided us with the ability to manage globally through MDS, which has been a valuable capability. It is convenient to have multiple pockets of global management from UniFi OS.

We realized the benefits of CloudGuard Duo Security quickly after deployment. Understanding the architecture, especially the MDS setup for higher-level organization control, allowed us to establish multiple pockets of management efficiently.

Unified security management allows us to streamline our security operations significantly. With centralized management through SMS and MDS, we can efficiently oversee not only the firewalls within our cloud exchange points but also on-premises devices, enabling a cohesive and unified security architecture across all environments.

I'm very confident in CloudGuard Network Security because it helps us secure our global network. With CloudGuard, we can set up rules to protect against risks from on-premises traffic and ensure security through various measures like single sign-on integration and VPN restrictions.

CloudGuard Network Security is a great product that fulfills firewall needs effectively and provides detailed insights. However, in multi-segment environments requiring multiple VRFs, it can be cumbersome and costly due to the need for separate firewalls.

The best lesson I have learned from using CloudGuard Network Security is to carefully consider the scalability requirements of each environment. While Check Point offers robust features, the lack of VRF support can lead to increased costs and complexity, especially in multi-segment setups where separate firewalls are needed for each segment.

Overall, I would rate CloudGuard Network Security as an eight out of ten.

Our use case for the product is to prevent or protect the file server in the Cloud. The plan is to gradually integrate more solutions behind it. We work with Azure and AWS. 

The tool's most valuable features are threat prevention and protection mechanisms. 

The connection to the on-premises management requires using the CLI. It's not just a click, and you cannot edit in the management to prepare everything. You need to do it online and in real time. After that, you must execute a script, and then you should be happy that it appears in the management.

I have been using the product for five years. 

CloudGuard Network Security is stable. I haven't encountered any issues with its stability. 

The tool is scalable. 

Choosing between Palo Alto and Check Point is more of a personal preference based on the management you prefer. However, in terms of protection, both provide a comparable level of security, making you feel equally safe. The choice between Palo Alto and Check Point often depends on the customer. If a customer is already using Palo Alto, it might be challenging to convince them to switch to Check Point. 

Deploying the product on different cloud platforms, like Azure or AWS, poses challenges due to variations in terminology and identification methods among platforms.

CloudGuard Network Security's pricing is fine. 

In most cases, we use the smart management on-premises. With the hybrid solution, we have one log visibility of every single management, which is an advantageous concept. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We place our CloudGuard Network Security gateways at the front on Azure, positioned with a load balancer. The configuration includes a load balancer and gateways on a virtual automation scale set in Azure. 

The solution is easier to manage than an on-premise firewall. It is easy to manage. The use of dynamic objects for these gateways made it easy to create the right rules and the right policies. Integration with Azure is also easy where we have to just add the subnets. In an on-premise setup, we have to add everything from scratch. We can automate a lot of actions.

We have the product deployed on Azure China. One crucial concern is the version limitation; unfortunately, in Azure China, we are restricted to running version R80. Our architecture has a Load Balancer, VMSS CloudGuard, etc. The duplication in this setup prevents the application from seeing the original client IP. This poses a problem for certain applications that require the original IP for login purposes. Although we managed a workaround with a different architecture involving a WAF, it is not as straightforward as the standard Azure setup.

I have been using the product for two years. However, my company has been using it for five to six years. 

CloudGuard Network Security's stability is high. 

The solution's scalability is good. 

We typically open tickets with our partner, but there was one instance where they couldn't provide a solution. In that case, we opened a ticket with Check Point directly, and they responded within four hours, resolving the issue.

We initially used on-premise solutions, starting with Juniper firewalls. However, when we migrated to Check Point for IPS protection, the experience was really good.

We have seen ROI with the product's use. It helps us reduce the manhours with upgrades and odd fixes. We can automate the process. It takes only a small amount of time. On-premise solutions require informing users about potential interruptions and, in worst-case scenarios, significant disruptions. The process involves extensive preparation, including ensuring that the necessary conditions are met for updating the cluster members one at a time. In contrast, on Azure, automation simplifies everything.

We tried to use Azure Firewall for one application as a proof of concept. However, Check Point is easier for us. 

We operate in a hybrid cloud environment with both on-premises and Azure, but we don't currently use other cloud providers like Amazon. Our on-premises SmartConsole remains in use, and overall, everything is running smoothly. Our confidence in the product is high. We believe that we can do better with its help. I would rate it a nine out of ten because it's very good with high potency and potential. However, it's not perfect. I faced issues with Azure China, and it's not as straightforward on other cloud platforms.

We utilize CloudGuard Network Security for internet surfing and handle inter-sector traffic between VPCs. Specifically, we have over 200 accounts in AWS, each with its own VPC. The solution interconnects all the regions. 

The tool's most valuable feature is its scalability. You will only have to pay less for scaling up. Its notable benefit is deployment complexity. Regional deployment is simpler compared to on-premise setup. 

When upgrading the firewall, the old VPC containing the firewalls needs to be destroyed. After that, a new firewall is redeployed in the setup. Additionally, there's a need to separate the routing, and the routing from the old VPC has to be recreated in the new one.

I have been using the product for two years. 

We had issues with stability. We have an open ticket at the support regarding this. 

CloudGuard Network Security is scalable. 

The tool's support is good. 

Positive

CloudGuard Network Security is not too cheap. 

I don't see any difference in user experience between on-prem and the cloud setup. We have an MDS environment where we can manage the whole country. The tool enables us to manage policies on the same platform for branches and regions in the country. I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

We use CloudGuard Network Security to protect our customer's Azure environments. 

The tool's deployment is rapid. Its dashboard is also useful. It's easy to deploy both on-premises and in Azure. In an office with VMware running, deployment is a simple process. Similarly, in Azure, deployment is easy and scalable. Adding more CPUs is a straightforward task – just shut it down, modify the security, and restart. This ease of use translates into cost and resource savings, and faster deployment times.

Clustering in Azure is a bit different, not using the Check Point cluster but relying on load balancing. It's not as instant as I'm used to; in Azure, it might take around half a minute to a minute, and during this time, services could be down. The delay is attributed to Azure using its load balancing mechanisms instead of the Check Point cluster.

I have been using the product for three to four years. 

The tool's technical support is generally good. While there might be occasional delays, they usually manage to resolve issues. 

Neutral

In Azure, when we refer to "size," it could be in terms of factors like the number of instances, bandwidth, or users. We use cloud-native platforms but prefer Check Point solutions. It is easier to manage since we know Check Point is on-prem. I have a high level of confidence in CloudGuard Network Security. I am familiar with Check Point and Azure. I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. 

We use the solution to control all the emails that go out from the company. We also use it to protect our network by stopping unauthorized people from accessing it.

The product enables us to check the information that goes out of the company. We get to know if someone sends our sales emails to our competitors. We control the information that goes out of the company. It’s a good product.

The product must provide different features like antivirus.

I am currently using the solution.

The tool always performs very well. All the upgrades happen automatically. We haven't had a problem with it.

We haven’t needed much support.

Positive

The solution’s pricing is a little bit high. I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is the lowest price, and ten is the highest price.

I would like to implement all the security solutions from Check Point in our company. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.