We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and AWS GuardDuty 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 offers solid incident detection and detailed reporting. It also provides control over IAM roles and advanced compliance features. AWS GuardDuty stands out for its data collection, threat detection, and monitoring capabilities. Users say Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management should improve its false positives rate, vulnerability assessments, and integration. They also want greater customizability. AWS GuardDuty could benefit from a mobile version and more dashboard analytics. Users requested better threat intelligence and integration with new AWS services.
Service and Support: Experiences with Check Point customer service have been generally positive. Some users praised its quick response times. However, others found the technical support to be lacking. AWS GuardDuty customers have reported satisfactory and quick responses from the Amazon team.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is fast and uncomplicated, although integrating it with cloud platforms may require additional time. In contrast, the AWS GuardDuty setup is straightforward and effortless, ensuring rapid and effective deployment.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management to be cost-effective, but others found that the license cost was a barrier to scalability. AWS GuardDuty offers a competitive pricing structure based on a pay-as-you-use model, with costs that vary depending on the level of usage.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides comprehensive cloud management solutions, addressing compliance challenges and minimizing administrative workload. Users have experienced a significant return on investment and witnessed substantial growth in ROI. AWS GuardDuty primarily enhances overall security posture, fostering customer trust, and creating potential business prospects.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is preferred over AWS GuardDuty. Users praise CloudGuard Posture Management for its comprehensive data security and protection. It offers complete coverage of users' entire cloud infrastructure. CloudGuar is commended for its granular reporting, rule customization, IAM role, and embedded machine learning for real-time attack prevention. Users said AWS GuardDuty has limitations in analytics, reporting, and monitoring.
"Deployment is great, and we didn't face any big challenges."
"The product has automated protection powered by AI/ML, which is now far more powerful than before. It uses AI/ML in its detection algorithm, providing fast and quick results."
"The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action."
"The solution is easy to use."
"One of the advantages of cloud services is the ability to use them on demand. There's minimal installation involved; you can check the latest offerings and make new deployments while dismantling the previous ones. This approach keeps you ahead of potential services, showcasing the agility of AWS."
"Since our environment is cloud based and accessible from the internet, we like the ability to check where the user has logged in from and what kind of API calls that user is doing."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"It presents great visibility of the traffic flow of our cloud, providing information on what data and users are circulating and in the event of a threat, it immediately identifies them by providing detailed and granular information from our entire environment."
"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."
"The new scanning function is a valuable feature that wasn't available until recently."
"We like the GSL Builder feature. When you're running a security operations center, you spend a lot of time monitoring endpoint activity to ensure there is no malicious traffic or anonymous access in the environment. The GSL Builder is helpful for deep investigations of a particular reason for an incident. You can use it to get more information."
"Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP's initial configuration is very easy. It is plug-and-play. It also gives regular updates."
"The system has deployed security tools to enhance effective investigations in the entire company networking system."
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its compliance engine and auto-remediation features."
"Good interface and visibility."
"We currently find Lacework to be much better at detecting vulnerabilities than AWS GuardDuty. The engines of AWS GuardDuty have to be improved."
"For the next release, they could provide IPS features as well."
"There is currently no consolidated dashboard for AWS GuardDuty. It would be helpful if they could provide a dashboard based on severity levels (high, medium, low) and offer insights account-wise, especially for users utilizing automation structures."
"AWS GuardDuty sometimes shows false positives and should have better detection accuracy."
"Cost changes. It's very expensive. If you turn on every feature, it's more than most commercial vendors. For smaller orgs, that doesn't make sense."
"It would be great if the solution had some automation capabilities."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"Amazon GuardDuty could be better enriched in threat intelligence data."
"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."
"They take time to respond or coordinate a meeting since they maintain a schedule that does not fit Latin America very well."
"We were demotivated by the lack of native automation modules for the Terraform and Ansible tools."
"The platform would be significantly enhanced by incorporating data security management capabilities."
"The Check Point Infinity admin portal sometimes freezes."
"I would like to see some AI on the back-end, just to assist with doing analysis and making recommendations."
"The price of this solution should be reduced so that it is more affordable to scale."
"Scalability, particularly in workload protection, is an area that needs improvement."
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 19 reviews while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 60 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2, while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". On the other hand, 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". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Lacework, whereas Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.