In summary, while Juniper vSRX is praised for its security features, performance, and integration capabilities, users have highlighted areas for improvement such as usability and interface issues. On the other hand, CloudGuard Network Security is appreciated for its firewall capabilities, user-friendly interface, and excellent customer support, but users have suggested enhancements in integration, setup process, and advanced threat intelligence features. Overall, both products offer valuable network security solutions with their unique strengths and weaknesses.
The summary above is based on 82 interviews we conducted recently with Juniper vSRX and CloudGuard Network Security users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The CLI and GUI do a good job of putting a lot at your fingertips."
"Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"I think that the UTM features are the most value, as it truly protects my infrastructure."
"The SD-WAN feature is the most valuable. This feature evolved from link load balancing. It has helped us in terms of our uptime and privatizing applications whenever we experience an outage. The SD-WAN feature has been a plus for us. Two-factor authentication has allowed us to add more users in terms of remote working. We have two-factor authentication for remote workers to authenticate them before they get on the network."
"The pipe filter application is an outstanding feature."
"FortiGate has a very strong unified threat management system."
"The Identity Awareness blade and dynamic tagging in Azure are valuable because they make access management automatic. Instead of manually setting up access for each new resource, it happens automatically based on the same access policy. This dynamic setup is scalable."
"SSL/TLS traffic inspection features are used for advanced threat prevention against secure SSL traffic."
"The tool's most valuable features are the REST APIs that help to automate the deployment and maintenance process. It helps us to reduce time to 15-25 minutes compared to the manual process which used to take around two to three hours."
"It's possible to sync the Check Point Management with the cloud portal, therefore allowing automated rules to be set in place whenever creating a new VM."
"It is scalable. It's a cloud solution, so it's easy to implement and manage."
"The CloudGuard Network Security's most valuable feature is implementing IPS for accessing our data center and server environment in Azure. It helps us to prevent attacks. By protecting our environment with Check Point, which we were already familiar with, it provided a solution that extended into the cloud environment."
"CloudGuard's intelligent tools help us automate many manual security tasks, guaranteeing our customers' environments will be secure."
"The query feature is going to be a game-changer for us as we move forward."
"The solution has good features."
"We like the solution’s protocol and its dashboard system."
"It's basic functionality is probably the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are application filtering, content filtering, the intrusion prevention system (IPS), and definitely the application firewall."
"It's a very powerful solution and the firewalls offer high performance"
"The product’s quality and performance are better than other vendors."
"The product's scalability is good, and my company has 150 users."
"There are a few valuable features that offer very good quality on the solution. Especially NetScreen. We used to use NetScreen for the the product line. It was a very mature solution, very robust, easy to configure, easy to manage, etc. It made it easy to do everything."
"For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial."
"We sometimes have issues with FortiGate's routing table in the latest firmware update. We had to downgrade the device because our customers complained about bugs."
"To some degree, it's almost a question as to why some of this stuff isn't simpler. For example, for an AP deployment, while it's integrated, the number of steps that you have to go through in order to get the AP up, seems like a lot."
"The user interface could be improved."
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve to be on par with its competitors, such as Palo Alto and Sophos. They are the market leaders. Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve its capabilities. However, we are happy with Fortinet FortiGate."
"The support is the main thing that needs to be improved."
"It would be nice if backups could more easily migrate between different models."
"The solution needs to support more hypervisors."
"The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"They can improve their security features to the next advanced level so that their efficiency in catching the malware can become 100%, and there is no scope for any data loss or leakage from the system due to any issue."
"The convergence time between cluster members is still not perfect. It's far away from what we get in traditional appliances. If a company wants to move mission-critical applications for an environment to the cloud, it somehow has to accept that it could have downtime of up to 40 seconds, until cluster members switch virtual IP addresses between themselves and start accepting the traffic. That is a little bit too high in my opinion. It's not fully Check Point's fault, because it's a hybrid mechanism with AWS. The blame is 50/50."
"The documentation has been rough. Being able to do it yourself can be hit or miss given the constraints of the documentation."
"Lacks the ability to integrate with other security solutions."
"Check Point CloudGuard is not a feature-centric product because Check Point concentrates on security."
"The licensing structure is unclear, so a transparent and flexible licensing structure would be preferable."
"The reporting can be improved."
"We worked with Cisco's support and Juniper's support and there are some differences, to be honest, Cisco is more available and is more competent at addressing our cases."
"The solution could improve its technical support."
"The tool's basic license does not cover everything. It needs to improve visibility and availability."
"Juniper vSRX is expensive."
"The solution can be improved by allowing automatic updates for the OS devices."
"We experienced some technical issues during implementation"
"There are too many types of licenses, which can be confusing."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 121 reviews while Juniper vSRX is ranked 24th in Firewalls with 33 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Juniper vSRX is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "Highly reliable, great visibility, and centralized management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with VMware NSX, Azure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Cisco Secure Firewall and OPNsense. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Juniper vSRX report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.
