We deploy solutions for customers. We don't engage in buying.
We are both consultants and implementers.
We deploy solutions for customers. We don't engage in buying.
We are both consultants and implementers.
We have not had any issues with the firewall.
Support is good and it's centralized architecture.
We are also working on load balancers. We don't have the option to work more with load balancers, we would like to see what else can come out of this in terms of security.
Technical support and scalability both require improvement.
I have been working with Check Point NGFW for the last ten years.
Check Point can scale but at times we have experienced some issues.
Palo Alto is better compared to Check Point. I would rate Palo Alto as superior support to Fortinet or Check Point.
We used to work with Fortinet for approximately five years, and the Palo Alto Appliances was some time back.
I believe the Palo Alto support is excellent, and it has more features than Fortinet. Many businesses, in my opinion, are choosing Palo Alto.
Palo Alto support is very good.
Fortinet's main issue is the support. We can't take it to the enterprise level because the Fortinet support is not very good.
Check Point has previously held a large market share, but perhaps not recently. I think that the price point in India is a bit different. Check Point offers options. I don't see that Check Point is very high, but it is geared more towards enterprises.
We have evaluated Palo Alto Networks VM-Series to see what was available, and recently, I researched the Azure VM series to know how it worked.
I'm leaning toward the now cloud. The appliance base has now been removed. We are now concentrating our efforts on the Azure Cloud, AWS, and other similar platforms. I believe that people must mature in order to work on it. That's where things stand. As a result, we must learn how this is implemented on cloud platforms.
I would rate Check Point a seven out of ten but NGFW a six out of ten.
It's a unified policy table that combines threat prevention and segmentation policies.
Smart Event allows consolidated event management and exporting features is very useful when we need to deal in reports, since, for some time now, everyone has been working from home and on the firewall from Check Point.
This function is implemented very conveniently and securely. The VPN over this firewall works as well as a standard VPN device. All in all, I'm delighted with their security solution. It is making configuring numerous layers of security policies easy to use and it always has been one of the things I liked most about their firewall solution.
Check Point firewalls are one of the most easy-to-use complete firewall solutions on the market. They protect our LANs against intruders, offer VPN for site-to-site connections, and haven't had a major issue in about 15 years.
While not being cheap, their pricing models are competitive.
A better approach to security focuses on prevention, blocking malware and other threats was difficult before they entered the network. By blocking the infection of “patient zero,” an NGFW with real-time prevention eliminates risk, damage, and cost to the organization.
It provides an SSL inspection facility. The SSL/TLS protocol improves the privacy and security of traffic by wrapping network communications in a layer of encryption and applying robust authentication. While this is a major benefit for data security, cyber threat actors also use SSL/TLS to conceal their activities on the network. An NGFW must go beyond signature-based detection to use technologies capable of detecting and remediating novel and zero-day threats.
Sandboxing (including static, dynamic, and behavioral analysis) is great.
It's nearly impossible to add an exception for threat prevention services - like antivirus and anti-bot. You will be stuck with Indicators of Compromise marked as detect only, caching issues, and random effects.
There is no clear way to report incorrect classification to support and a business is neither happy nor forgiving when they cannot receive mail from a crucial business partner.
The KBs article should also be improved as all the global KB articles do not provide all the activity steps related to every issue.
I have been using this product for the last five years.
I have not used any other product.
The setup is very easy with minimal cost for licensing as well.
I have not used any other product.
I'm at a university in Queretaro, Mexico and it's used to protect our infrastructure: wireless, LAN, PCs. Since the solution prevents attacks, we have the checkpoint in all our equipment, from the critical infrastructure to the directors' and employees' cell phones.
This is the best enterprise solution. Almost every university in Mexico has Fortinet or VXN, but our mission is to have the best cybersecurity protection for our information and our users. We're a private university and our clients and information are the priority. This is the reason why I chose Check Point NGFW.
The solution interface is good. It has three different ones: the NGFW, the Endpoint, and Harmony Mobile.
I've been using this solution for five years.
It is very stable.
The scalability of this solution is good.
Because my employees work in other departments, we used the deployment consultant. The service was very good.
The setup was simple because we had the checkpoint expert support. The time it took was standard and once the installation was complete, there was no problem at all.
The setup was simple because we had our partner and checkpoint expert support. The time it took was standard and once the installation was complete, there was no problem at all.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. This is a very good solution. It's complex because it's not too easy to use, but the brand and our partner help us with NG Firewall configuration issues or other solutions like Harmony.
The university is growing every year and with that, I purchase more endpoint licenses and Harmony Endpoint because the firewall works well on the dimension and capacity. Next year, we plan to integrate Harmony Email and Office. The solution also prevents threats to Office 365.
We are using this product as a firewall which does have the capacity to block the IPS signature as well.
It is highly accurate for the IPS engine and has the best-in-class log monitoring and report generating facility in the firewall.
It is easy to manage, as it has a centralized management console. We are using the firewall as a VPN service as well. It is very easy to troubleshoot the issue with the VPN. We are using IPSEC features where we can enable tunnels with the client and we can safely communicate with vendors due to encryption.
Checkpoint NGFW improved the security posture of our network infrastructure to the point where we can use antivirus, IPS, and antibot features to tighten up the security. We can also use URL filtering where we can block malicious URLs in communications. We can easily stop and detect Day-Zero attacks.
The throughput of the firewall is very big for data transitions. The antivirus also includes DPI (deep packet inspection), which examines the data within the packet itself rather than only looking at packet headers. This enables users to identify, categorize, or block packets with malicious data more effectively.
The IPS feature is the most valuable feature. We can block zero-day attacks within stipulated time intervals. The up-gradation activities are much simpler when we are dealing with Check Point firewalls.
If there is a critical issue observed, the Check Point support team can create a custom package that we can deploy on the gateway to mitigate critical issues/bug fixes.
The support reachability is very promising, as we can directly connect with them via call or chat from the support portal.
Sometimes the KB article does not include all the steps. There is a chance for improvement in the content of global KB articles. It's nearly impossible to add an exception for threat prevention services - such as antivirus and anti-bot. You will be stuck with Indicators of compromise marked as detecting only, caching issues, and random effects. There is no clear way to report incorrect classification to support.
Sometimes we need to find a resolution by ourselves as the solution's knowledge base is not enough.
I have been using this solution for five years.
The stability is good.
We can easily scale the gateways with a few simple clicks.
Technical support is great.
Positive
We did use a different solution. Check Point provides better visibility where security is concerned.
The setup was very straightforward
We can implement it by ourselves.
The ROI is double annually.
It is pretty cheap as far as the setup cost, pricing, and/or licensing are concerned.
We looked at Palo Alto firewalls.
We wanted to deploy a specialized Next-Generation Firewall in our perimeter security.
The solution addresses the Security requirements at Perimeter Layer including:
It was required to enable IPSEC VPN between our vendors across the world
We got positive responses on Check Point Firewalls from our vendors as well.
Our team addresses the regular audits with a Next-Generation Firewall, starting from configuration and application vulnerabilities to customized reporting.
We have planned to achieve many business use cases including IPS, Network AV, Content Awareness - Data Leakage Prevention, IPSEC VPNs between our peers, SSL VPN with Posture Assessment, and Web Proxy as well.
This solution addressed most of our needs but required multiple license subscriptions.
Below are the few Business use cases we achieved through Check Point NGFW:
The SSL VPN with posture assessment helped us to remove the dedicated Standalone SSL VPN solution which was benefited both commercially and technically.
Anti-Bots and IPS enabled security on the network traffic.
Along with VPN and Proxy (Web and application control), we removed another standalone proxy for internal use and extended the content filtering to roaming users as well.
The security posture assessment with two-factor authentication has saved more time and commercial costs by avoiding deploying having to deploy another solution.
It took so many weeks to migrate our old firewall to Check Point after we did internal and external assessments on earlier setups and enabled multiple security features.
We had difficulty configuring the NAT. For example, instead of following A-B-C, we need to do A-C-B
Initially, we faced a few challenges with firmware. Later this was addressed with jumbo hotfixes.
We tried to create a single management software to manage the policies, view the logs, have a mobile access VPN, and do reporting.
Please concentrate on local services enablement for faster resolutions.
We have been using this solution since July 2020.
Initially, we faced a few challenges with the firmware. We later addressed this with help of jumbo and custom hotfixes. Later, it performed well.
The solution is scalable in terms of enabling the features and deploying management servers.
We would recommend they have regular feedback sessions with customers.
Neutral
We used another firewall that enables basic security features with lot of limitations.
We found the setup difficult in the earlier stages as our team used to work with another CLI-based solution.
Our In-house team handled the implementation.
I'd advise users to validate the licensing model during the pre-evaluation period itself. It took a few days for us to understand DLP and Mobile Access Blades that had to be procured separately along with the NGTP bundle to address our requirements.
We evaluated Palo Alto and FortiGate.
Our organization implements, maintains, and operates Check Point's firewall.
Check Point solutions were implemented by our organization in accordance with the project documentation and further adjusted at the request of the customer.
We ourselves also use a Check Point firewall in conjunction with a firewall from another vendor - both to protect our network perimeter and to test various functions and new emerging firewall capabilities and identify various bugs before they reach customers in the product environment.
We and our customers use almost the entire palette of capabilities of the firewall solution from Check Point. We use almost every feature, from anti-spoofing and network segmentation to URL filtering and intrusion prevention systems. We also willingly use virtual private networks from Check Point, both site to site and client to site. We also leverage the antivirus blade and anti-DDoS attacks. Some of our customers use Check Point capabilities for mobile devices, which are also successfully implemented in the firewall.
We found a very successful implementation of the virtual private network client, since, for some time now, everyone has been working from home. With the firewall from Check Point, this function is implemented very conveniently and securely.
A convenient new version of the firewall management console, which, starting with the R80 version, has become standard for many Check Point blades, however, unfortunately, not for all. You still need to use older consoles to manage some features. For example, to access the monitoring blade, I need the old console, but the new console should start it.
You need to merge all the old consoles into one new one and make the interface more convenient for the novice administrator. Until now, the initial settings as well as subsequent changes to the "iron" part of the firewall, namely its interfaces, routing, or DCCP settings, you must use the web interface through a browser. This is inconvenient. Of course, you can use the command-line for these purposes, however, this also complicates the configuration process for the administrator and requires a well-known habit.
I've used the solution for six years.
There is room for improvement in terms of stability.
The scalability is great.
Technical support could sometimes be better.
Neutral
I have used and still use solutions from Sophos, however, in Check Point, some functions are implemented more conveniently. For example, work with logs.
Before installing, I recommend to go through the training.
I handled the implementation myself.
The ROI is good.
We use the product as our main and only Firewall/Gateway/VPN Gateway. we are in the finance sector, and we need a very reliable and robust system.
We rely heavily on the VPN system, as most of our employees are working outside the office at this time.
We also have two appliances to improve reliability, we have internet access through two ISPs configured to work simultaneously.
Our internal LAN is with duplicated network nodes that are double connected to our Check Point cluster. That way, we have full High Availability.
Before our purchase of Check Point products, we used an open-source product that lacked good integration between products and setting up to work was very tricky.
We use the Check Point mobile VPN, which is very stable and easy to use. It allows our employees to change their internal domain password when it becomes old, even when they are outside of the office for a long time. The VPN client can connect to our internal network even before the user is logged into his laptop. This allows users to receive GPO policy updates.
The solution offers very good central management, which saves time and is hassle-free.
One of the most useful new feature is dynamic definitions. For example, if you need to allow all of the Microsoft Azure IP addresses, you can insert them dynamically and Check Point will update them for you. Without it, to find all IP addresses would be almost impossible.
You can create additional layers for the firewall rules. This allows better organization and performance of the product by skipping to the rules that are responsible for this group of protected devices.
There are some GUI features in Check Point's SmartConsole that are still from the old versions and are in separate/duplicated interfaces; it would be most useful if it is integrated and not on different menus.
We would like to have a better search engine on the checkpoint.com site. Right now, it is difficult to find, for example, a newer version of the Check Point VPN Mobile client. The search engine shows most visited sites and the newer version won't be the most recently viewed site page. As it is right now, you have to find the general VPN page form, and from there you have to look at what version of the product you need and then go to the page of the latest version.
We have been using this product for five years.
Check Point is very stable.
We haven't needed to expand our throughput capacity.
However, based on the Check Point documentation, it is hyperscale ready capable of up to 475 Gbps of Threat Prevention.
It is very good. Our local representatives are very helpful.
Positive
We moved from a previous solution to Check Point as it is more reliable and easy to manage, and our old solution wasn't able to provide the level of security we desired.
We have had some problems understanding how to set up HA, however, we managed to do it. This was mainly due to the fact that we didn't have experience with Check Point products in the past.
We did everything in-house.
New users should know that the first year of support is included in the equipment. After that, you have to buy it.
We choose between Palo Alto and Checkpoint.
We like it. It works well.
Our primary use case for Check Point NGFW is as our internal firewall within the datacenter to route traffic within it as well establishing our rulebase for part of our datacenter.
We have also implemented some other nodes as ICAP servers only. They have been a great replacement even though the installation was not the easiest.
They are the last line of defense (or first depending on how you look at it) within our perimeter and are therefore a critical part of our system within the company.
Check Point NGFW have been a real rock in terms of reliability (except for Identity Awareness) and we have not had any issues in terms of CPU or memory usage as our model might have been overkill with how well it is able to process traffic and how easy and unimpactful it is when adding new blades to manage this traffic
One ability that Check Point has is that it is the first to provide us with the ability to use identities instead of using the traditional IP-based format, which allows way more flexibility in what we can do with the rule base.
Identity Awareness has been an absolute gamechanger in how we've been able to create rules within the company. It allows us to give access to certain resources in very specific ways that were not possible before.
The SmartConsole is a very powerful interface compared to many other competiting products, which allows us to seamlessly go from watching logs, to modifying the rule base and easily find what objects are used where or even check which logs are linked to a specific rule
Logs are very well parsed when sent to Splunk.
Identity Awareness has been a massive source of problems for our deployment and the ability to debug it has been lacking.
The VPN setup is definitely way harder than it should be. The wizard or anything surrounding it doesn't allow for a quick setup without having to read documentation or actually getting a project with an external company
Our gateways have not felt like a day older than when we first got them, on the other hand, our physical management server Smart-1 has been definitely showing its age as it is sometimes quite long to do anything on SmartConsole when it decides to act up.
I have been using Check Point since joining my current workplace - about 4 years ago.
In 4 years, we've only really had one big incident with availability that was due to a faulty network card, which was changed quickly once diagnosed.
Since we chose a model larger than our needs, we aren't looking for a scalable solution.
Customer service and support have been a bit hit or miss and it takes a while for escalation to happen, however, once it does happen, you get proper support right away.
Neutral
I was not present within the company when it was decided to switch from one solution to another, and actually our previous solution was Check Point as well - and it was just reaching its end of support.
I did not participate in the setup.
We used a vendor team along with our in-house team.
I would need to compare it with other solutions used in our environment, which I haven't done.
I'd advise users to only choose blades when they are absolutely necessary - unless getting a good deal with a package.
As mentioned, we switched from Check Point to Check Point.
For the Identity Awareness setup, try to follow Check Point guidelines from the start as it is really capricious and hard to debug.
