We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and AWS GuardDuty 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 offers solid incident detection and detailed reporting. It also provides control over IAM roles and advanced compliance features. AWS GuardDuty stands out for its data collection, threat detection, and monitoring capabilities. Users say Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management should improve its false positives rate, vulnerability assessments, and integration. They also want greater customizability. AWS GuardDuty could benefit from a mobile version and more dashboard analytics. Users requested better threat intelligence and integration with new AWS services.
Service and Support: Experiences with Check Point customer service have been generally positive. Some users praised its quick response times. However, others found the technical support to be lacking. AWS GuardDuty customers have reported satisfactory and quick responses from the Amazon team.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is fast and uncomplicated, although integrating it with cloud platforms may require additional time. In contrast, the AWS GuardDuty setup is straightforward and effortless, ensuring rapid and effective deployment.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management to be cost-effective, but others found that the license cost was a barrier to scalability. AWS GuardDuty offers a competitive pricing structure based on a pay-as-you-use model, with costs that vary depending on the level of usage.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides comprehensive cloud management solutions, addressing compliance challenges and minimizing administrative workload. Users have experienced a significant return on investment and witnessed substantial growth in ROI. AWS GuardDuty primarily enhances overall security posture, fostering customer trust, and creating potential business prospects.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is preferred over AWS GuardDuty. Users praise CloudGuard Posture Management for its comprehensive data security and protection. It offers complete coverage of users' entire cloud infrastructure. CloudGuar is commended for its granular reporting, rule customization, IAM role, and embedded machine learning for real-time attack prevention. Users said AWS GuardDuty has limitations in analytics, reporting, and monitoring.
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"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."
"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."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"We like the platform and its response time. We also like that its console is user-friendly as well as modern and sleek."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"My favorite feature is Storyline."
"The solution is easy to use."
"One of the advantages of cloud services is the ability to use them on demand. There's minimal installation involved; you can check the latest offerings and make new deployments while dismantling the previous ones. This approach keeps you ahead of potential services, showcasing the agility of AWS."
"The out-of-band malware detection from the EBS volumes. It's really cool. No agents or anything needed, it automatically finds and correlates based on malware."
"It is a highly scalable solution since it is a service by AWS. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"What we found most valuable in Amazon GuardDuty is its threat detection feature, especially because we were monitoring a huge number of AWS accounts, so we needed a solution that would monitor for any kind of malicious activity. The monitoring aspect of the solution was great because it gave us timely notifications if and when anything happened, and Amazon GuardDuty helped keep us on our toes to make sure we took action right away."
"What I like most about Amazon GuardDuty is that you can monitor your AWS accounts across, but you don't have to pay the additional cost. You can get all your CloudTrail VPC flow logs and DNS logs all in one, and then you get the monitoring with that. A lot of times, if you had a separate tool on-premise, you would have to set up your DNS logs, so usually, Amazon GuardDuty helps with all your additional networking requirements, so I utilize it for continuous monitoring because you can't detect anything if you're not monitoring, and the solution fills that gap. If you don't do anything else first, you can deploy your firewall, and then you've got your Route 53 DNS and DNSSEC, but then Amazon GuardDuty fills that, and then you have audit requirements in AU that says, "Hey, what are your additional logs?", so you can just say, "Hey, we utilize Amazon GuardDuty." You're getting your CloudTrail, your VPC flow logs, and all your DNS logs, and those are your additional logs right there, so the solution meets a lot of requirements. Now, everything comes with a cost, but I also like that the solution also provides threat response and remediation. It's a pretty good product. I've just used it more for log analysis and that's where the value is at, the niche value. Once you do threat detection, it goes into a lot of other integrations you need to implement, so threat detection is only good as the integration, as the user that knows the tools itself, and the architecture and how it's all set up and the rules that you set within that."
"With anomaly detection, active threat monitoring, and set correlation, GuardDuty alerts me to any unusual user behavior or traffic patterns right away, which is great for staying on top of potential security risks."
"It helps us detect brute-force attacks based on machine learning."
"The comprehensive security for IaaS and PaaS cloud assets provides efficient security awareness to all the teams."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"We really liked its ease of implementation against our Microsoft Azure environment."
"The rulesets and the findings are valuable. The actual core functionality of it and the efficacy of events are great."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to work with the APIs to integrate into our own backend systems."
"The solution has intelligence that integrates with a range of threat intelligence feeds, including Check Point's ThreatCloud, to provide real-time intelligence on emerging threats."
"Auto remediation is a very effective feature that helps ensure less manual intervention."
"It helps us to analyze vulnerabilities way before they get installed in production and the web. It gives us more security in the production environment."
"The main area for improvement I want to see is for the platform to become less resource-intensive. Right now, it can slow down processes on the machine, and it would be a massive improvement if it were more lightweight than it currently is."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"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."
"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"PingSafe can improve by eliminating 100 percent of the false positives."
"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."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"It would be great if the solution had some automation capabilities."
"Because it's a threat detection service, they need to keep up with the various threat factors because new threat factors and attack factors come up all the time."
"Amazon GuardDuty could be better enriched in threat intelligence data."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
"There is currently no consolidated dashboard for AWS GuardDuty. It would be helpful if they could provide a dashboard based on severity levels (high, medium, low) and offer insights account-wise, especially for users utilizing automation structures."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"The Check Point Infinity admin portal sometimes freezes."
"I would like an interface more adapted to cell phones or tablets."
"We were demotivated by the lack of native automation modules for the Terraform and Ansible tools."
"I am not a technical person, but generically, the user interface can be a little more intuitive. Our staff has trained network security and cloud security professionals, and they get it, but when you are trying to get to the customers to be able to pick it up and maintain it, it can be a bit difficult."
"The reporting dashboard responds slowly, which leads to late report compilation."
"Compliance checks on cloud resources against various industry standards and compliance framework templates need to be improved."
"Check Point tools need to improve the latency in the portal since they take a long time to load."
"Check Point must provide a multi-cloud facility where AWS, Azure, and GCP can seamlessly work together and display posture in an integrated manner."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 64 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2, while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". 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". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, whereas Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR and Orca Security. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP 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.
