We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation 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 solid data security, advanced incident detection, and detailed reporting. It offers IAM role control and governance support. Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation has been praised for its automated policy writing and visibility into application communication and network protocols. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management could be more customizable and improve its false positives rate and vulnerability assessments. Users suggested that Zero Trust Segmentation should support more operating systems and improve its labeling functionality.
Service and Support: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management customer service has garnered positive feedback, highlighting prompt responses and pleasant support experiences. Some Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation customers commended the support team, while others expressed discontentment.
Ease of Deployment: The setup for Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is fast and straightforward, requiring only a few minutes. Setting up Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation is significantly lengthier, taking around six months to finish.
Pricing: Some users found Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management affordable, but a few reviewers thought it was expensive and recommend exploring alternative options. Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation is generally considered expensive.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provided our reviewers with a solid return by simplifying administration and compliance solutions. We have not received feedback on ROI from Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation users.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management over Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation. CloudGuard is praised for its comprehensive data security, granular reporting, and ruleset customization. It offers visibility into traffic flow, threat detection, and real-time attack prevention. Users appreciate its intuitive dashboard, powerful reporting, and ability to enhance security. Illumio Zero Trust Segmentation is criticized for its limited operating system support and lack of effective agents in certain environments. Users also desire better customer service and improved data security.
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"It is advantageous in terms of time-saving and cost reduction."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"The comprehensive security for IaaS and PaaS cloud assets provides efficient security awareness to all the teams."
"We like the ability to investigate, analyze, and generate reports."
"The rulesets and the findings are valuable. The actual core functionality of it and the efficacy of events are great."
"On Dome9, you can have reports on compliance, users created, and EAM access to the cloud infrastructure. For example, if some machine is exposed to the Internet, importing and exporting to the Internet when it shouldn't, we get immediate alerts if someone does this type of configuration by mistake. Dome9 is very important because AWS doesn't protect us for this. It is the client's responsibility to make sure that we don't export things to the Internet. This solution helps us ensure that we comply with our security measures."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"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."
"I can take proactive actions based on an alert without having to interact with the platform directly."
"The audit feature is the most valuable for compliance reasons. It gives you a full view of the whole environment, no matter how many accounts you have in AWS or Azure. You have it all under one umbrella."
"The flexibility of the solution is its most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of Illumio Adaptive Security Platform is monitoring. When I have no requirement from the other application, I can use the web block traffic to build."
"The product provides visibility into how the applications communicate and how the network protocols are being used."
"The Explorer allows you to know the traffic between source and destination."
"It has helped us to understand internal network visibility and firewall policy implementation. We use the product to simplify firewall policy implementation."
"The features that I have found most useful is the ability to centralize all the rules and then distribute them across various locations. However, I've encountered challenges related to tagging policies, which can be complex to devise. It's a matter that requires careful consideration and stakeholder involvement before implementing such policies."
"The solution helps to maintain logs and monitor activities. It also helps us with access management. The tool helps us to secure organizational data that include files."
"The solution is easy to use."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"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 takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"Sometimes the Storyline ID is a bit wacky."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"The technical support could be better, but I do not know of any other needed improvements."
"Timely updates and upgrades to meet modern technological changes could help improve performance and limit the chances of downtime."
"The tool has a lot of potential, but today, it lacks a lot of Scripts/Bots for Azure."
"The reporting dashboard responds slowly, which leads to late report compilation."
"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."
"When rules change, it messes up the remediation. They haven't found a fix for that yet. The remediation rule goes into limbo. It's an architectural design flaw within their end compliance engine—a serious bug."
"The support must be more effective."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"The solution is very basic and doesn't do anything other than the orchestration of layer four endpoint firewall rules."
"The customer service is lagging a bit. It could be better."
"Some of the features that can be improved is offer additional guidance on creating an effective and risk-free tagging policy would be highly beneficial."
"The product’s agents don't work very well in OT environments."
"It requires a low-level re-architecting of the product."
"I would like to see better data security in the product."
"The interaction we've had with the support team hasn't been ideal. Technical support should be improved."
"Illumio Adaptive Security Platform could improve by supporting more operating systems. For example, Cisco and Apache appliances."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 8th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 64 reviews while Illumio is ranked 4th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 8 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Illumio is rated 8.0. 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 Illumio writes "Pprevents attackers or threats from spreading or moving laterally". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Qualys VMDR, whereas Illumio is most compared with Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Zscaler Internet Access and Zero Networks Microsegmentation. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Illumio 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.