We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration and CloudPassage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."PingSafe released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. PingSafe's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"We use the infrastructure as code scanning, which is good."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the phishing protection it offers."
"The solution has a very effective anti-phishing algorithm that detects a significantly higher number of phishing emails compared to the default Microsoft solution."
"As with most of the other Check Point products, the CloudGuard SaaS has the advanced visibility of the events and alerts."
"The setup is very easy. I haven't faced any complexity with the setup of the solution."
"I appreciate the ease of deployment and the intuitive dashboard. Even someone with basic IT knowledge can easily understand the dashboard and identify potential threats."
"I like the fact that having granular information about the potential threats is received in email."
"Getting reports and finding threats in the console is easy."
"Its total protection has been the greatest aspect since it completely protects all the mail from the cloud."
"Key features are the Software Vulnerability Assessment and the CSM, which is the configuration check."
"Policies are very easy to manage on a day-to-day basis."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"PingSafe is an excellent CSPM tool, but the CWPP features need to improve, and there is a scope for more application security posture management features. There aren't many ASPM solutions on the market, and existing ones are costly. I would like to see PingSafe develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM, CSPM, and CWPP. Another feature I'd like to see is runtime protection."
"I used to work on AWS. At times, I would generate a normal bug in my system, and then I would check PingSafe. The alert used to come after about three and a half hours. It used to take that long to generate the alert about the vulnerability in my system. If a hacker attacks a system and PingSafe takes three to four hours to generate an alert, it will not be beneficial for the company. It would be helpful if we get the alert in five to ten minutes."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"They could improve Check Point support response times. Sometimes it takes days to resolve or even days to get a first response."
"A signature-based filter could improve the solution's AI model for spam email."
"I need to go to Check Point's admin portal if I want to see the license list and the details of the users of the tool, making it an area of concern where some ease of process should be provided from an improvement perspective."
"They must provide security to more email service providers."
"The implementation could definitely be better."
"We still get some false positives. There are times when legitimate stuff gets flagged and it could be that somebody is expecting a very important email but they don't end up getting it. On the flip side, when we alert Check Point about stuff like this, it is corrected, so they are improving. That's a plus."
"The solution fails to support hybrid deployments."
"Other vendor support teams go after fixing the issue the moment that they join the remote session. The problem that I have faced with Check Point support is that they share the case number with me, then it takes at least two days for them to join a remote session with us, even though we have asked for this timeframe to change. Even though we have already explained the problems that we are facing or the business pain points in our network on the call or email, we have to repeat the problem statements again in the console. It can take four or five days to resolve the issue from the moment they understand the problem. This includes the time to teach their R&D or internal team whatever the issue is. I have faced timeframes as long as seven to 10 days for fixing some issues."
"Of all the advertised functions, I only find two things that really work in my environment, even though I wanted to use all of them. They're not flexible enough to be used."
"Anything outside of the software vulnerability management and the CSM, things like the GhostPort, need some improvement. The dashboard is in beta. It looks really good, I wish it would come out of beta."
"In the CSM module the policies are really hard to work with it. It is not very flexible at all. I would suggest that they change that. Right now, the scan is based on the group that the server is in. What happens if the server is in multiple groups?"
"The reports and graphs are unintuitive."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is ranked 9th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 49 reviews while CloudPassage is ranked 41st in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP). Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is rated 8.6, while CloudPassage is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration writes "Has a user-friendly dashboard, a great anti-phishing algorithm, and sandboxing for testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CloudPassage writes "CloudPassage has a bunch of features. Be sure you understand all of them and how to extract value to your organization". Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Avanan, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Mimecast Email Security and Cisco Secure Email, whereas CloudPassage is most compared with . See our Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration vs. CloudPassage report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.