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."The ability to integrate it with Microsoft Azure Sentinel allows us to validate the logs in an even more complex and meaningful way."
"All of the features are very useful in today's market."
"We like the ability to investigate, analyze, and generate reports."
"The CloudGuard for Cloud Intelligence tool has several significant features that provide security to our company."
"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."
"The automatic learning and an AI engine help to find more modern vulnerability problems."
"The product allows us to enhance the security of the implementations we have."
"The reporting against compliance is an important feature that helps you comply with policies and standards within your organization."
"The product helps us with privileged identity management to control who has access to what and for how long."
"It is very easy to use, which is what we look for in these types of solutions."
"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."
"The ability to prevent users from using certain applications is one of the most valuable features. It doesn't require any configuration for implementation from the client perspective. It just works right away and gives you the information you need."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Defender helps us control which applications are being used and gain more security insight into remote and hybrid users based on user identity and log in location. You can also integrate Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender for Endpoint to extend its capabilities."
"The costs are high."
"Check Point tools need to improve the latency in the portal since they take a long time to load."
"Adding a feature that allows me to easily identify the changes that have been made to the CIS benchmark and update my own policy accordingly would be a valuable addition to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management."
"Reporting should have more options."
"We're looking for a solution that can incorporate legacy infrastructure for some of our business needs."
"I would like to see Test B functions at the application access level."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"The software configurations theory is complicated, and without proper planning and a well-skilled technical team, it cannot perform its tasks properly."
"The integration with macOS operating systems needs to be better."
"Defender for Cloud apps is primarily useful for Azure apps. It has limited capabilities for applications based on other cloud platforms."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps’s technical support services needs improvement."
"I would prefer to have filtering options incorporated within the policies, enabling the solution to perform tasks beyond mere blocking or allowing."
"They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products. The integration with all the other products is still ongoing."
"I want them to enhance in-session policy."
"It doesn't actually decrease the time to respond. This has been an issue with Microsoft recently. Sometimes, there is a delay when it comes to getting an alert policy email... Sometimes it takes two or three hours for that email to be sent."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Vulnerability Management with 60 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, AWS GuardDuty, Wiz, 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.