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, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Vulnerability Management."Checkpoint posture management gives you visibility across your entire cloud infrastructure, so it helps you with management, maintenance, and compliance. With visibility across all these cloud platforms, you can protect against compromised credentials or identity theft."
"We know the vulnerability in advance, so we can take some action for that vulnerability."
"The reporting is quite good. It is the most powerful aspect of this solution."
"This solution has saved the company from unnecessary data loss that occurs due to cyber attacks."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its reporting capabilities for aggregating vulnerability information and scoring."
"The ability to integrate it with Microsoft Azure Sentinel allows us to validate the logs in an even more complex and meaningful way."
"The solution is scalable."
"Shadow IT discovery is the feature I like the most."
"The feature that helps us in detecting the sensitive information being shared has been very useful. In addition, the feature that allows MCAS to apply policies with SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive is being used predominantly."
"Everything from Microsoft is integrated. You receive regular reports on them all. You can push your reports, logs, and security alerts, which are all integrated. It is crucial that these solutions work natively together to deliver coordinated detection and response across our environment."
"The most valuable feature is the alerting system."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management. It's important."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is to stop shadow IT."
"Defender's integration with our identity solutions is critical in our current setup."
"If your business requirements are relatively simple, it can get the job done."
"The reporting has a lot of opportunities to continuously improve so that we can continue to show value."
"The support it provides is not very good. They should improve it since we have had several setbacks due to support issues."
"The guidelines to implement or to link with the clouds are not complete."
"Reporting should have more options."
"I would like to see Test B functions at the application access level."
"One feature of the product that I would like to enhance is the possibility to connect to vulnerability management platforms so that the issues that emerge from the scans can then be ingested directly into the vulnerability management process."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"The integration process could be enhanced by enabling integration at the organizational level rather than requiring the manual setup of individual accounts."
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"They need to improve the attack surface reduction (ASR) rules. In the latest version, you can implement ASR rules, which are quite useful, but you have to enable those because if they're not enabled, they flag false positives. In the Defender portal, it logs a block for WMI processes and PowerShell. Apparently, it's because ASR rules are not configured. So, you generally have to enable them to exclude, for example, WMI queries or PowerShell because they have a habit of blocking your security scanners. It's a bit weird that they have to be enabled to be configured, and it's not the other way around."
"Currently, reporting is not very straightforward and it needs to be enhanced. Specific reports are not included and you need to run a query, drill down, and then export it and share it. I would love to have reports with more fine-tuning or granularity, and more predefined reports."
"We would like to get more information from the endpoint. I don't get enough detailed information right now on why something failed. There is not enough visibility."
"Generally, the pricing can always be improved along with the management system."
"There are challenges with detection and there are challenges with false-positive rates."
"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."
"We sometimes get errors when we create policies, which is somewhat annoying because some policies stop working due to misconfigurations. We find this challenging because it limits our options for troubleshooting an issue."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Vulnerability Management with 56 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 8.4, 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, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Wiz 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.