We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and Checkmarx One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The features I have found most valuable are the comprehensive threat prevention capabilities, automated policy management, and seamless integration with cloud environments."
"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."
"It is a very scalable and stable solution."
"After integrating AppSec with other applications, team members can easily work without fear of confidential information exposure."
"User attitude reviews help us keep all online users compliant with company regulations and policies."
"The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."
"We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results."
"On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"The most valuable feature for me is the Jenkins Plugin."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities. It's one of the key features they provide that's an excellent selling point. They're always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database."
"It shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."
"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement."
"Deeper and more transparent integration between Cloud Application Security and analysis monitoring tools could be very valuable - although the solution currently offers integrations with third-party security tools."
"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."
"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."
"One of the big problems we found in Check Point, in general, is the support."
"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"Some of the descriptions were found to be missing or were not as elaborate as compared to other descriptions. Although, they could be found across various standard sources but it would save a lot of time for developers, if this was fixed."
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 12th in Application Security Tools with 28 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 8.8, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with SonarQube, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Checkmarx One report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
