We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and SUSE NeuVector 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 provides robust data security measures, incident detection, and detailed reporting. It offers IAM role control, training features, and governance support. On the other hand, SUSE NeuVector stands out for its user-friendly interface and automation. NeuVector seamlessly integrates with CI/CD pipelines and supports ISO certification checks. Check Point CloudGuard could be more customizable and improve its vulnerability. NeuVector needs improvements in monitoring, reporting, and hybrid environment integration.
Service and Support: Customers generally have positive experiences with Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's customer service, citing quick response times and good support. However, some say technical support needs improvement. In contrast, SUSE NeuVector is praised for its helpful and responsive support, although the process can sometimes be complicated.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is quick and easy, typically taking only a few minutes. On the other hand, the setup for SUSE NeuVector can be more challenging, with varying levels of difficulty reported by users. Some users find it easy, while others find it complex. One specific challenge with NeuVector is integrating it with pipelines.
Pricing: Some users consider Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management affordable, while others say the licensing model is a barrier to scaling and suggest a more flexible licensing model. While some SUSE NeuVector users say the price is low, others believe there is room for improvement.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides effective cloud management, streamlines compliance, and decreases administrative workload, resulting in a notable return on investment. SUSE NeuVector is particularly advantageous for industries with significant risk and exposure, but other sectors like retail might not see the same return.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management over SUSE NeuVector. It is highly regarded for its strong data protection and comprehensive coverage of cloud infrastructure. Users appreciate its intuitive dashboard and powerful reporting capabilities. SUSE NeuVector users say the initial setup is a chore and the solution offers limited support for scanning IaaS and virtual machines.
"The solution helped free other staff to work on other projects or other tasks. We basically just had to do a bunch of upfront configuring. With it, we do not have to spend as much time in the console."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"The identification of misconfigurations, maintenance of compliance in a centralized way, and visibility across all the multi-cloud tenants are the key functionalities."
"The Compliance engine has helped put our auditors and senior executives at ease, as we can quickly and accurately measure ourselves against hundreds of compliance checks to include CIS benchmarks, PCI, and other best practices."
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its compliance engine and auto-remediation features."
"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."
"We know the vulnerability in advance, so we can take some action for that vulnerability."
"The tool is also very intuitive; its dashboards are very complete and provide a lot of valuable information for decision-making to improve security."
"People implementing this solution are concerned with addressing a significant risk, and within the AWS realm, this tool does de-risk substantially."
"The rulesets and the findings are valuable. The actual core functionality of it and the efficacy of events are great."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"Their search feature could be better."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"Bugs need to be disclosed quickly."
"The tool has a lot of potential, but today, it lacks a lot of Scripts/Bots for Azure."
"Scalability, particularly in workload protection, is an area that needs improvement."
"I am not a technical person, but generically, the user interface can be a little more intuitive. Our staff has trained network security and cloud security professionals, and they get it, but when you are trying to get to the customers to be able to pick it up and maintain it, it can be a bit difficult."
"Currently, this solution is somewhat expensive."
"I would like an interface more adapted to cell phones or tablets."
"The product must provide different features like antivirus."
"We were demotivated by the lack of native automation modules for the Terraform and Ansible tools."
"Down the road, we would like to see automation. That is probably a feature that most people want. If they can automate patching a vulnerability, it will be much easier."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 64 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 15th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 7 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. 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 SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Qualys VMDR, whereas SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Sysdig Falco, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Sysdig Secure. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. SUSE NeuVector 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.
