We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and Waterfall Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use. Anyone can easily maintain it."
"We can detect any attack of viruses or malware at the first point of contact."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"I like how we can achieve total integration."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"Its management web interface is very easy and user-friendly."
"I use it as well as a VM. We use it a lot because we have all fiber optic connections, so we could use almost all of that. The federation is beautiful because I can transfer all traffic to my main site where I can use just one link to the internet, and I can use it as a proxy as well. It is good to keep control and security."
"After introducing this NGFW, we have improved our security posture, and now, have peace of mind."
"I have to say that it was Application Control and web filtering are excellent."
"Being able to access almost everything in one location manage all your gateways and get all your logs is great."
"The tool provides great security."
"As a system administrator my favourite part of Check Point is the smart view tracker. This alone is a must-have tool for tracking all traffic traversing the Check Point appliance."
"It creates granular security policies based on users or groups to identify, block or limit the usage of web applications."
"This is a professional solution which has been the most valuable aspect of its use."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"It would be nice if backups could more easily migrate between different models."
"NGN, reporting and controls."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"I would suggest that Fortinet add sandboxing to their solution."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"The UTM filtering needs improvement."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"With the version we're on, it's a bit time-consuming if you have multiple IP addresses to add. But in the later versions, which we're moving to, it makes it a lot easier to add IP addresses with dynamic objects, as they call it."
"The VPN part was actually one of the most complex parts for us. It was not easy for us to switch from Cisco, because of one particular part of the integration: connecting the Check Point device to an Entrust server. Entrust is a solution that provides two-factor authentication. We got around it by using another server, a solution called RADIUS."
"The URL objects take significant time in processing compared to other products like Cisco FTD; it would be better if they could improve it."
"It would be great if the access management, the user management features, were improved in terms of the number of users that can be connected, and how users can access the various resources with the help of firewall authentication."
"The support team should be faster."
"There is room for enhancement in the support system in India."
"It is a bit expensive according to the required blades but it is a platform that is worth having as security in a corporate."
"There should be better integration with our current NAC solution to increase the granularity of policies that we implement."
"The interface of this solution could be more user friendly. The initial set up could also be made more simple."
Check Point NGFW is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 277 reviews while Waterfall Security is ranked 5th in Operational Technology (OT) Security with 1 review. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while Waterfall Security is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Check Point NGFW writes "Good antivirus protection and URL filtering with very good user identification capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Waterfall Security writes "Cyber security solution used for data transmission that requires training to make use of all of its powerful features". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense and Azure Firewall, whereas Waterfall Security is most compared with OPSWAT MetaDefender OT Security and Nozomi Networks.
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.