We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Wiz, SentinelOne and others in Vulnerability Management."It provides complete visibility of workload hosted on different cloud platforms including AWS and Azure, along with multiple tenants."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"I love the work involved in maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds using this solution, versus using native native cloud security controls. It is so much better. The different cloud platforms all have their own way that they handle a lot of the stuff that Dome9 handles. Even within their platform, they are in a lot of disparate places, e.g., in AWS, there are five different tools. You have to jump between them to get the same information that you can just pull in automatically on Dome9, which is just one platform. We are using multiple platforms, so that makes it even more complicated and time consuming if you had to just rely on them to get all of your information. Whereas, it's all just summarized and put together on the Dome9 end."
"It offers advanced detection of threats that can harm data from the cloud database."
"This product provides a really nice visualization of the infrastructure, including network topology, firewalls, etc."
"The reporting against compliance is an important feature that helps you comply with policies and standards within your organization."
"Good interface and visibility."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"Shadow IT discovery is the feature I like the most."
"We have become more aware of what services our users are using, how often they are using them, and what data is being sent out of the organization and to which services. So, it is really a lot about visibility and helping us make decisions based on that. It drives some of our policy decisions for adding extra security controls."
"The most valuable feature is its policy implementation."
"It is very easy to use, which is what we look for in these types of solutions."
"The solution does not affect a user's workflow."
"The product helps us with privileged identity management to control who has access to what and for how long."
"Threat detection is its key feature, and that's why we use this tool. It gives an alert if a PC is attacked or there is any kind of anomaly, such as there is a spike in sending emails or we see an unauthorized website being accessed. So, it keeps us on our toes. We get to know that there is something wrong, and we can isolate the user and find any issues with it. So, threat detection is very robust in this tool."
"I like the alert policies because they are quite robust. It has some built-in templates that we can easily pick up. One of them is the alert for mass downloads, when a particular user is running a massive download on your SharePoint site."
"The costs are high."
"It should have some options to activate API calls to the platform in the cloud, another improvement would be that when the rules are colonized and they want to be published."
"The tool should incorporate more use cases like improving security scores. It should also improve documentation."
"Automatic remediation requires read/write access. When providing read/write access to third-party applications, this can add risk. It should have some options of triggering API calls to the cloud platform, which in turn, can make the required changes."
"In general, for the product to be successful, they need to improve security, and configuration detection."
"It does not support on-premise deployments such as VMware Tanzu, and this has been a major drawback when it comes to integrations with some applications."
"Currently, worldwide, there are many companies of all sizes that do not understand the value that their data has, but even with all existing clouds, they also do not understand what the shared responsibility model is. They only assume that by having a cloud, the provider must ensure safety, when the truth is that the providers only secure their sites. Everything we do in the cloud and how we configure it is actually our responsibility."
"Automation and advanced threat prevention have room for improvement."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps’s technical support services needs improvement."
"Defender could integrate better with multi-cloud and hybrid environments. It requires some additional configuration to ingest data from non-Azure environments and integrate it with Sentinel."
"I believe it's only set to be integrated with Microsoft Defender for identity and identity protection. I would like to see it available for use with something like Office 365 Defender. I don't think it's integrated with that yet."
"I would like to see them include more features in the older licenses. There are some features that are not available, such as preventing or analyzing cloud attacks."
"Generally, the pricing can always be improved along with the management system."
"The response time could be better. It will be helpful if the alerts are even more proactive and we can see more data. Currently, the data is a little bit weak. It is not complete. I can't just see it and completely know which user or which device it is. It takes some effort and time on my part to investigate and isolate a user. It would be great if it is more user-friendly or easy for people to understand."
"This service would be better if it had a separate license, only for this service, that could be used to track usage."
"Sometimes the support is actually lacking."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 6th in Vulnerability Management with 64 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ranked 2nd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 30 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is rated 8.4. 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 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps writes "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need". 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 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Qualys VMDR.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.
