We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud and Data Center Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"They're responsive to feature requests. If I suggest a feature for Prisma, I will need to wait until the next release on their roadmap. Cloud Native Security will add it right away."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"It provides the most useful tools for protecting our financial account records from hackers."
"The administration portal panel is very intuitive."
"It has an analytics service that does research for us."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"It is able to bring visibility into that cloudy space where the security departments do not really see what is happening on the DevOps side. It brings visibility, security control, and standardization."
"The CloudGuard for Cloud Intelligence tool has several significant features that provide security to our company."
"Compliance is becoming an important tool for us as well."
"The dashboard is intuitive. You know if you're compliant or not, and then it gives you a remediation plan."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"There is no break-glass account feature. They should implement this as soon as possible because we can't implement SSO without a break-glass feature."
"Their search feature could be better."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"The Check Point solution is somewhat expensive."
"The performance can be better. Sometimes, the performance is not up to the mark. There is also integration complexity with third-party software and tools."
"CloudGuard could be improved by including integration with vendors other than AWS, especially Azure, especially in permissions."
"The tool should incorporate more use cases like improving security scores. It should also improve documentation."
"It does not support on-premise deployments such as VMware Tanzu, and this has been a major drawback when it comes to integrations with some applications."
"Almost all features are good, however, they still require improvements to the code security portion on which integration with the major source code repository is required."
"Adding a feature that allows me to easily identify the changes that have been made to the CIS benchmark and update my own policy accordingly would be a valuable addition to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 3rd in Cloud and Data Center Security with 17 reviews while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 8th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 64 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Qualys VMDR. See our Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors and best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
