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."The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"The UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its storyline, which helps trace an event back to its source, like an email or someone clicking on a link."
"From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The way they offer container security is a big highlight that I have noticed. The solution is also agentless, so the scanning, runtime, really everything is offered directly by CloudGuard."
"The most valuable feature is the single dashboard that enables us to manage the entire cloud environment from one place."
"The CloudGuard for Cloud Intelligence tool has several significant features that provide security to our company."
"I love the work involved in maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds using this solution, versus using native native cloud security controls. It is so much better. The different cloud platforms all have their own way that they handle a lot of the stuff that Dome9 handles. Even within their platform, they are in a lot of disparate places, e.g., in AWS, there are five different tools. You have to jump between them to get the same information that you can just pull in automatically on Dome9, which is just one platform. We are using multiple platforms, so that makes it even more complicated and time consuming if you had to just rely on them to get all of your information. Whereas, it's all just summarized and put together on the Dome9 end."
"The most valuable feature is posture management, which gives you complete visibility of all your assets in the cloud and allows you to do governance and compliance."
"The identification of misconfigurations, maintenance of compliance in a centralized way, and visibility across all the multi-cloud tenants are the key functionalities."
"We like the ability to investigate, analyze, and generate reports."
"The ability to drill down to individual hosts on an account and see which ones are affected is valuable."
"I would like additional integrations."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"While it is good, I think the solution's console could be improved."
"Bugs need to be disclosed quickly."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"There's an array of upcoming versions with numerous features to be incorporated into the roadmap. Customers particularly appreciate the service's emphasis on intensive security, especially the secret scanning aspect. During the proof of concept (POC) phase, the system is required to gather logs from the customer's environment. This process entails obtaining specific permissions, especially in terms of gateway access. While most permissions for POC are manageable, the need for various permissions may need improvement, especially in the context of security."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"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."
"Reporting should have more options."
"The software configurations theory is complicated, and without proper planning and a well-skilled technical team, it cannot perform its tasks properly."
"Streamlining the user interface would greatly improve the user experience."
"The guidelines to implement or to link with the clouds are not complete."
"The accuracy of its remediation is a 7.5 out of 10. Before, I would have given it a ten but now, to handle remediation for fully qualified domain names, it's not working as it did in the past. We're finding some difficulties there."
"Scalability, particularly in workload protection, is an area that needs improvement."
"The reporting dashboard responds slowly, which leads to late report compilation."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 2nd 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.
