We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Sysdig Secure based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides complete 360 security, granular reports, a governance and administration portal, and automated compliance checks. Sysdig Secure stands out for its seamless integration with cloud services, strong DevSecOps capabilities, reliable runtime security, and efficient log monitoring. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management could benefit from expanded reporting, better investigation of security events, reduced price, and additional features for vulnerability assessments and integration. Sysdig Secure users say the solution should improve Cloud Security Posture Management while making the dashboard simpler and more customizable.
Service and Support: Some customers have had positive experiences with Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, while others have reported delays and said the technical support needs improvement. Sysdig Secure users describe the support team as excellent and well-informed.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management may require professional deployment. Users say Sysdig Secure's setup isn’t complex if customers have skilled personnel or a dedicated team.
Pricing: Check Point’s pricing has received mixed reviews. Some users say Check Point is affordable, but others say the price could be lower. Sysdig Secure licensing is considered flexible and reasonable. The cost varies depending on factors like the number of agents used and the user's environment.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management delivers an excellent ROI and valuable compliance solutions. Sysdig Secure users have provided no feedback on ROI so far.
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"It is scalable, stable, and can detect any threat on a machine. It uses artificial intelligence and can lock down any virus."
"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."
"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"The most valuable feature is the CloudBots for auto-remediation of security findings."
"The feature that I find most valuable is the blocking feature."
"Assets Management as it provide complete visibility of our workload inkling EC2 instance or Serverless"
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its compliance engine and auto-remediation features."
"It has great scalability."
"Alerts of cloud activity happening across all accounts is helpful."
"Checkpoint posture management gives you visibility across your entire cloud infrastructure, so it helps you with management, maintenance, and compliance. With visibility across all these cloud platforms, you can protect against compromised credentials or identity theft."
"It learns from behavior, attacks, management, detections, captures packets, real-time analysis, et cetera. It's generating knowledge from a variety of sources for an excellent analysis."
"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."
"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."
"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."
"The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying to do, he proactively takes that as an investigation topic and looks into it. He'll provide the solution even though we might not have asked him to investigate it."
"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."
"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."
"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."
"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"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."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"PingSafe's current documentation could be improved to better assist customers during the cluster onboarding process."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"Currently, I would like this solution extended to cellular devices or tablets."
"I would like to see tighter integration with other compliance tools, like Chef Compliance, in addition to Inspector."
"Especially with cloud security, there's too much clutter on the screen and too many things going on."
"The software configurations theory is complicated, and without proper planning and a well-skilled technical team, it cannot perform its tasks properly."
"Down the road, we would like to see automation. That is probably a feature that most people want. If they can automate patching a vulnerability, it will be much easier."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"The reporting dashboard responds slowly, which leads to late report compilation."
"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."
"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."
"Reporting can definitely be better. Live dashboards should be configurable for a longer period of time rather than 30 days. Being able to go back in time to compare six months ago to today would be valuable."
"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."
"The dashboard could be more simple and show the more important issues that are detected first. We'd like to be able to set it up so more important issues show up more prominently in the dashboard."
"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."
"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."
"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 4th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 64 reviews while Sysdig Secure is ranked 13th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 9 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Sysdig Secure is rated 8.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sysdig Secure writes "A security scanning tool with great insight on your workloads running anywhere". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Sysdig Secure is most compared with Wiz, Sysdig Falco, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector and Qualys VMDR. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Sysdig Secure report.
See our list of best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.
