We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and Checkmarx One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Whenever there was a new CVE, Check Point CloudGuard WAF used to block them."
"Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI."
"The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."
"It provides advanced analytics that gives each team time to prepare for any threat that might occur in the future."
"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."
"The solution offers continuous security monitoring and alerting, which can help organizations detect and respond to security incidents in real time."
"The solution offers sophisticated security techniques with unique characteristics that can be particularly valuable for the financial sector, which is where we develop apps."
"On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"It has all the features we need."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."
"You need to know exactly the system. You cannot have someone running the system if they don't have the knowledge to do so."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"Deeper and more transparent integration between Cloud Application Security and analysis monitoring tools could be very valuable - although the solution currently offers integrations with third-party security tools."
"It doesn't detect user activity like some of its competitors. It's not a vulnerability, but it's a legitimate activity that it doesn't detect. It only detects vulnerabilities or misconfigurations."
"The documentation needs to be updated, more improved, and simplified... so that even a beginner can start with this application. It can make things more beginner-friendly."
"A feature we'd like to see in the future is something that could protect against other attack vectors, with a focus on application protection."
"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 11th in Application Security Tools with 30 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 9.0, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with SonarQube, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Checkmarx One report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
