Check Point Harmony Endpoint Reviews

We use it primarily for mobile phones. That is it. We really aren't using it in depth at all. We're using it just with basic configuration.

The biggest value we found was ease of deployment. I haven't really used it much, so I can't really comment beyond that. I haven't used it much, but it's working.

It isn't exactly the cheapest, but then it's Check Point. The price could be improved.

I'd also love to see them add full MDM support, but I appreciate that that's not the product market. If it did come in, I'd be more than happy to look at additional modules. It was probably one of the easiest products I've ever had to deploy it, but if it's not capable of doing MD, then that's going to impact its usefulness to us.

I haven't had any problems with the stability of the solution.

We've had no issues with scalability so far. We're not using it very extensively at all. I use it for less than 30 people. It's not like we're using it on thousands and thousands of machines, but I don't foresee any issues with it if we did.

We have less than 30 users, currently. I think there are 15 active at the moment. I've got 15 more licenses to buy, but we're not going to be doing that until after Christmas. We're not in any rush for those.

I haven't needed them. I haven't spoken to them. It really was that simple. It's like buying a microwave meal. You read the instructions, which there are not a lot of, and it works.

The initial setup was easier than anything. It took 20 minutes. I was actually on a holiday and I liked it. I set it up and deployed it all from a mobile phone on a beach. It's that easy.

I didn't need any outside help, apart from the people I bought it from, who actually requested the portal and I got an email address and a password. I got a username or password through my email address and then I had to do everything else myself and it was so easy. It's ridiculous.

I bought them for 12 months and I genuinely cannot remember what I paid for them. I think it's about 100 pounds per user per year, so about 10 pounds a month per person.

It's very basic from what I see. It's not a full MDM solution and it's restricted with other MDM provisions. If you want to use an MDM with it to do other things like your email provisioning to mobile devices, you don't have very many options. I think it's AirWatch, MobileIron, Intune, or SOTI: only the most expensive products. If you want to look at something a little bit cheaper, you've got to pay through the nose. You can't have a cheaper solution as an MDM and run this concurrently. That's why they need to look at integrating with more MDM vendors. 

Other than that, it's okay. It does what it needs to do and it's going to tick a box that protects me for the next 12 months until I'm ready for the next project, which I am not yet. I'm one man trying to deal with 140 users across five different countries. So, I'm flat out and I don't have some time to do all the other bits.

The biggest lesson I learned is just because it's expensive, it's not always the best. If you want it to integrate with other products, though, you've got to pay a lot of money for other products as well. That's the only issue that I've got with that.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten, purely because there are additional features I'd love to see, but that is it. If you're doing it on the deployment side of things, I'd give it a ten out of ten. If you're looking at the product as a whole, however, there are a few things I think are missing, but only as additional features. Nine out of ten other customers would probably give it a ten out of ten because they don't need the features that I need. For me personally, it is a little bit empty in certain places. There's so much more they could do with that to make it the most awesome market cornering product there is, but it's not there yet.

The primary use case for this solution is security.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the VPN.

I would like to see support for a policy in the appliance that will refuse to create a connection if it does not detect an active virus scanner.

Two-factor authentication is missing from this solution.

The stability is very good.

This is a scalable solution.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We use it for government utility billing, with all of our systems located in different places, working remotely as well. We also have an on-prem data center here in India. We have Check Point to cover all these things.

We used to have Fortigate, the firewall, and endpoints were only protected by an antivirus. We did not have threat management or ransomware protection. We upgraded to Check Point to get this kind of protection at the endpoint level. It covers firewall, availability, VPN, IP security, IPS, application control, URL filtering, antibot, antivirus, anti-spam, and sandblast threat emulation and extraction.

The entire industry may move to the cloud, where we don't have to worry.

The stability is good.

The scalability is there.

Their technical support is good.

We changed from Fortigate because we deal with public data, government data, utility billing. It is very important to maintain security to the greatest extent possible. We can't afford to lose data.

Our billing cycle that takes place periodically. If we miss something, lose data due to ransomware or the like, we are totally out or operation. We can't again continue the billing cycle in such a situation. It is subject to penalties imposed by the local state government.

The deployment was very simple. It took about 20 days.

We had help from a Check Point solution partner.

Check Point offered very good pricing through negotiation. The licensing is done yearly. We have a three-year subscription, including premium, direct support; the Next Generation and SandBlast are for two years. Our cost, including everything, is 18 lakh rupees.

Symantec is expensive so we did not go for it. Many solutions are equally good, you could go for any of them. Check Point offered competitive pricing and additional features. Symantec may be suitable for certain applications and certain data centers. But what we found over a period of time Check Point suits our purpose.

If you have a medium-size environment like ours, this solution should serve the purpose, although you may need different things. In security, one thing cannot suit everybody.

We have about 500 users of the solution. We don't have any immediate plans to increase our usage. Any increase would be at least two to three years in the future, given the type of environment and workloads that we have. 

We primarily use the solution to prevent and detect the abnormalities and viruses on endpoints. 

It's also to monitor endpoints and the use of endpoints when it comes to identifying items like USB sticks, etc. because it's not really in our company policy to allow the use of a USB at work stations.

The most valuable feature is the integration with Check Point's firewalls. You can have one port, and follow the logs from both Endpoint and firewall security.

The solution could improve VPN functionality and the VPN user-interface.

The solution is very stable. We are quite happy with the solution, and we have had very few issues with it.

Scalability is very good. 

Technical support is fairly good. I'd rate it three out five. It's fairly good, but not optimal. 

Check Point could offer better personal support. They have a ticket system, but once you create a ticket, it can take up to seven to days before you get any feedback at all. Depending on the situation or the problem that we have, that's far too long.

We previously had a Cisco solution.

The initial setup was complex. From an IT department perspective, we don't have that many IT technicians, so, for us, it was complex. If we had put an IT engineer on Check Point, it might have been easier. 

Implementation took about two days. The strategy was to do the implementation outside of office hours, so it was actually done over a weekend.

We are outsourcing the maintenance, which is about 4 hours of work a month.

We had a consultant assist us in the implementation.

We pay roughly 80,000 Swedish krona per year. When it comes to the firewall, it's roughly 150,000 Swedish krona yearly. There's also maintenance, of course, which is roughly 10,000 krona per month.

We evaluated a few solutions, including Cylance. We evaluated the existing solutions and compared them to Check Point.

My advice to others considering implementing the solution is, depending of course on if the company is looking for a new kind of firewall solution, is "Don't do it yourself."

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have implemented Check Point for endpoint protection.

We had a ransomware attack and the SandBlast agent automatically picked up the ransomware. It automatically deleted the ransomware and restored the encrypted files.

The most valuable feature of Check Point Endpoint Security is the SandBlast Agent.

One area of this product that has room for improvement is the disc encryption.

I'd like to see a patch management solution like Kaspersky has. That's the only feature that's missing.

Check Point Endpoint Security is very stable.

Check Point Endpoint Security is very scalable. There are 11 of us. You need a central management station with one person. Everybody here is using it already.

The technical support is good. If you log calls, they're very quick to respond.

We used Kaspersky. The Check Point Endpoint was new. We wanted to roll it out to our clients. We wanted to first try it in-house.

The initial setup is straightforward. It was very quick. It was probably, in total, about 40 minutes.

We are Check Point partners. We did it ourselves, in-house.

Our license is on a yearly basis. It just includes the licensing fee.

We did have a look at some other options like Symantec and McAfee. We found that the anti-ransomware component on the Check Point was better than the competitors.

My advice to others that are looking to implement Check Point Endpoint Security is that it's very secure. The only issue is that the disc encryption is bound to the hardware in the machine that it's in. It takes a bit long to decrypt the hard drive. That's the only issue. 

I'd give Check Point Endpoint Security about a nine out of ten.

We primarily use this solution as the main firewall for the perimeter of the hospital. We use the firewall itself for URL filtering, application filtering, and identity awareness.

Before we used this solution, our mail used to have a lot of spam and most of the time our main email account was blacklisted. Now it works well; we are whitelisted by all organizations, including Google. Also, the security of our institution has really improved.

They should provide bandwidth regulation so we can monitor and regulate bandwidth.

It's 100% stable. It has never failed me in all the years I've used it.

I do not think I have had any higher scale than now. Initially, we used the R77.3, but I have just upgraded to the Gaia R80 operating system. For the amount of user we need, it usually works well. We have 5,000 users on it and it is still running okay.

Actually, we have already ordered two more boxes. We are waiting for them to arrive in the hospital. They are both from the 15400 series.

The technical support is fine. We've got a good relationship with the company. If there is any problem, they respond very well and fast.

For maintenance, we have a service agreement with the vendor who brought it to our institution.

We had SonicWall, but it was not stable. With the number of users we needed, SonicWall became a bit overwhelmed.

When we started it the initial setup was very complex. I have never been given any training on Check Point. I had to learn on the job.

The deployment did not take long, the guys who came to the place from Check Point did it very fast, it was a fast thing, within a day or two.

Return on investment was the first thing we checked. We are okay in that regard. We are not complaining.

We pay on an annual basis. There are no additional fees, they mostly tell us what we have to pay. We have budgeted for it.

We looked at firewalls from Fortinet and Barracuda. We even brought guys here to test their solutions, but they were no match for Check Point. We are comfortable now with Check Point.

My advice is to get Check Point, even without trying it first. Use it, and you will be very, very secure. Check Point guarantees the security and stability of your network.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We are an international systems integrator company for Check Point Endpoint Security software solutions.

It's easy to deploy Check Point. If you try to download files or if you try to access any website, Endpoint will secure the activity. The malware will not be permitted to enter from the internet or USB drives. 

The SandBlast agent is the most valuable feature for Check Point Endpoint Security. We've found that the Check Point SandBlast agent is mature.

The remote deployment with Check Point Endpoint Security requires improvement. We have to depend on some of their deployment tools. 

I would like a dependable system endpoint protection management tool or remote deployment tool. The deployment on the remote client needs some type of tool to implement it.

The stability of Check Point Endpoint Security is quite good. One single install is enough. You can forget about it. Then it just takes care of scanning and updates. 

The beauty of Check Point Endpoint Security is the forensics. The forensics are very complicated too and it is easy to understand if some malware has entered into your PC. 

With Check Point forensics, they provide a pictorial diagram in the materials when malware is downloaded, when it is activated, when it is trying to contend with it, and when it is quarantined. 

Across the entire Check Point Endpoint Security software package, the network reports are really good.

For maintenance, one or two employees is more than enough. We have about 30 users total in our company.

The technical support from Check Point is really awesome. They initiate a call once they find a result. From the charts, alerts, and reports, you can reach out to support. 

If you share your phone number, they will call. Check Point provides us with really great support. Unless the issue is resolved, they will not disconnect the phone.

We also used Symantec and some of their anti-malware products. Once we tested Check Point, we realized that it's a lot better. 

The initial setup of Check Point Endpoint Security was very easy. What we found was that they redesigned the entire UI, now called Infinity. Infinity is the new platform they evolved.

The Infinity platform gives us good results and is easy to manage. The entire process is straightforward. The deployment did not take much time, maybe close to three hours.

With Check Point Endpoint Security, you can go with the Suite license or you can go with the individual Blade license. I recommend the Full Suite license.  

Check Point Endpoint Security is not 100% compatible with Kaspersky and Symantec products. You can go only with Endpoint, i.e. you cannot mix with a competitor's solution.

It could be a good solution because they have multiple ways to handle the licensing model. If someone requires an encryption license, it is extra and not included in the base license. If you have any intellectual property, then the financial investment will be worth it. 

If you compare Check Point Endpoint Security to Kaspersky, Kaspersky has two types of suites. One is the Select plan and one is the Advanced plan. If you go with their Advanced plan, then that will collect all of the web confidence reports, many of which vary. 

Check Point Endpoint Security is easier for the administrator compared to Kaspersky, in terms of alerts and reporting. The admin receives regular reports and each report says how many total Windows versions are there, how many Office instances there are, etc.

Each product will have a unique set of advantages and different backgrounds, but when it comes to security, we are happy to go with Check Point Endpoint Security.

We also looked at Kaspersky. 

The anti-malware we found very good on Check Point Endpoint Security. Mainly we observe the overall deployment and then maintenance is easy. It is only one click and you can deploy everything.

Whoever wants their data secure, and they want to have peace of mind, make sure to go with the anti-malware capabilities on the SandBlast Agent. 

We consider Check Point Endpoint Security to be one of the best systems for SAP. 

The zero-day anti-exploit solutions should be there with Check Point Endpoint Security. Because of the budget, people keep the software, but my advice is that it is also a must-have software. You should have SandBlast Agent along with the anti-malware capabilities installed. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use it to help clients solve their security problems.

It helps clients have a better view of the risks. It also helps increase staff productivity by more than 50 percent, in my estimate.

The most valuable features are the innovations that they release in every version. The end-user facilities for managing the tool are also good.

I'm not sure what they are thinking about in terms of additional features at the moment, but I hope that they'll maintain focus on the tool to enhance the solution. 

Areas that have room for improvement are the scope of the product and, while I think the support is good, they can improve support as well.

It has a good level of scalability. They expand the solution with new and helpful features.

Technical support provides good solutions. They are available and respond quickly. They are knowledgeable.

Each scenario is different depending on the client's requirements or the regulations they need to follow or what they need to cover around risks.

The initial setup is easy, but because we are resellers we are trained in setting it up.

In addition to the standard licensing fees, there is a cost for support.

We have more than 70 products related to security solutions and we are resellers of many of them.

Consider the solution as one of your options because it's one of the top tools.

I rate this solution at nine out of ten because it covers what it needs to cover. As always, there is room to improve, but I think it's a good product.