We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The CLI is robust and powerful, enabling rapid, consistent changes via SSH."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"It has improved our security capabilities."
"The most valuable features of the solution are SD-WAN, filtering testing applications, web filtering, and the new VPN."
"It's very easy to configure."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"The ability to set up remote systems is the most valuable feature."
"The security fabric is excellent."
"The performance has been very good."
"It is easy to use, and its management is the best. Check Point has a great unified management solution for firewalls and security products."
"With the new SmartTask offered in R80.40, we will be happy to configure some automatic control-functions."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized management, which gives us control over all of the Check Point gateways."
"They utilize various gateway features, including Identity as a Service (IDaaS), anti-spam, antivirus, and other security measures, effectively creating a robust defense against a wide range of potential risks."
"Check Point's Quantum helps our clients in their overall cybersecurity practice."
"The packet inspections have been a strong point."
"I like the SmartEvent feature. When we see a threat, SmartEvent can create a rule for that. SmartEvent works with the SmartCenter to block a threat attack with a block monitor. The SmartCenter has the management for all the firewalls and data centers in a single dashboard."
"The most valuable feature of Zscaler Internet Access is that it is a consolidated solution, it comes with many features, such as DLP."
"Zscaler covers all the features needed to replace a VPN or proxy solution. They are good. They've been on the market for 15 years now, so they are mature enough."
"The solution replaces multiple vendor technologies with one which makes it worth the cost."
"The most valuable features I found in Zscaler Internet Access are the restriction of users for a particular URL, the security feature related to stopping DDoS, and the VPN."
"One feature that is valuable to me from an implementation point of view is that it's very easy to implement."
"The URL filtering has been the most valuable feature."
"The solution is scalable and stable."
"The VPN is valuable, as the whole technology is very different from a traditional VPN."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"Fortinet FortiGate should improve the VPN tokens."
"The solution lacks sufficient filtering."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"As far as wanting more scalability or things in the network diagram, it's going to cost you."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"I don't like that anything more than very basic reporting is not included."
"SmartEvent Settings and Policy GUI, and the rest of external apps should be improved."
"The only thing which I think should be improved is that training should be increased. In my position I also interview potential employees and I haven't found many people in the market, nowadays, who are familiar with the Check Point firewall. They are more familiar with Palo Alto and Cisco ASA and they are more comfortable with them."
"For R80.10 and above, if you want to install a hotfix, then you can't install it through the GUI. I don't know why. In the earlier days, I was able to do the installation of hotfixes through the GUI. Now, Check Point said that you have to install hotfixes through the CLI. If that issue could be resolved, then it would be great because the GUI is more handy than the CLI."
"There have been a few requests/issues about the Identity Awareness feature."
"It would be best if the security management server console access is simpler for ease of management."
"I would like there to be a way to run packet captures more easily in the GUI environment. Right now, if we want to read packet captures, we have to do so from the command line."
"Check Point could improve the time for delivering requested features from customers."
"Of the areas of improvement that I want to see in this product, without a doubt, one is the technical support. In this time of globalization, with so many cyberattacks and risks, the Check Point support staff take a long time to attend to incidents due to the high demand."
"It needs better integration with other applications. It takes a fair amount of regular activity to apply the by-passes because it is very strict in its restrictions and frequently you have to go in and open things up to allow the workforce to work."
"There are a few features that are not compatible with the Azure cloud."
"The reporting functionality could be a bit easier to use. There is a reporting function, but it's quite hard to do any good reporting, from a user-management perspective. For example, if a department manager wants to know how his department is using the web, there is a way to get the data, but it's quite cumbersome to get it and show it well. And that's true for comparing between departments."
"If they can also integrate with the multi-factor authentication to prompt users to do another, second-factor authentication, that would be ideal."
"One thing that needs to be improved is their presence in China. I'm not sure if that's a Zscaler thing or if it's a problem with all vendors in this space, but it would be nice to have better coverage in China. This concern is a common one for vendors across the board when dealing with the Chinese market."
"The interface for administration could be better. They should upgrade the management portal."
"Zscaler Internet Access needs to integrate more ISPs. It is good to have more than three ISPs."
"Zscaler should provide adjacent services, which would be complementary to their current offering that could to be more pragmatic for a customer. For example, if you take Akamai, you get multiple sets of services, all depending on the customer and the strategy and the complexity and the problems. In some areas, they are more varied in terms of coverage."
Check Point NGFW is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 275 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. 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 Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense and Azure Firewall, whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Appgate SDP. See our Check Point NGFW vs. Zscaler Internet Access report.
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.