We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Sysdig Secure 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 complete 360 security, granular reports, a governance and administration portal, and automated compliance checks. Sysdig Secure stands out for its seamless integration with cloud services, strong DevSecOps capabilities, reliable runtime security, and efficient log monitoring. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management could benefit from expanded reporting, better investigation of security events, reduced price, and additional features for vulnerability assessments and integration. Sysdig Secure users say the solution should improve Cloud Security Posture Management while making the dashboard simpler and more customizable.
Service and Support: Some customers have had positive experiences with Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, while others have reported delays and said the technical support needs improvement. Sysdig Secure users describe the support team as excellent and well-informed.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management may require professional deployment. Users say Sysdig Secure's setup isn’t complex if customers have skilled personnel or a dedicated team.
Pricing: Check Point’s pricing has received mixed reviews. Some users say Check Point is affordable, but others say the price could be lower. Sysdig Secure licensing is considered flexible and reasonable. The cost varies depending on factors like the number of agents used and the user's environment.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management delivers an excellent ROI and valuable compliance solutions. Sysdig Secure users have provided no feedback on ROI so far.
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"The UI is very good."
"When creating cloud infrastructure, Cloud Native Security evaluates the cloud security parameters and how they will impact the organization's risk. It lets us know whether our security parameter conforms to international industry standards. It alerts us about anything that increases our risk, so we can address those vulnerabilities and prevent attacks."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"Its monitoring and alerts are triggered by a failure or non-compliance with policies. It helps us to be able to act effectively and quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the CloudBots for auto-remediation of security findings."
"The solution has intelligence that integrates with a range of threat intelligence feeds, including Check Point's ThreatCloud, to provide real-time intelligence on emerging threats."
"It provides critical insights that enable the IT team to plan and launch smart investigations when there are security breaches."
"I love the work involved in maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds using this solution, versus using native native cloud security controls. It is so much better. The different cloud platforms all have their own way that they handle a lot of the stuff that Dome9 handles. Even within their platform, they are in a lot of disparate places, e.g., in AWS, there are five different tools. You have to jump between them to get the same information that you can just pull in automatically on Dome9, which is just one platform. We are using multiple platforms, so that makes it even more complicated and time consuming if you had to just rely on them to get all of your information. Whereas, it's all just summarized and put together on the Dome9 end."
"Gives us centralized firewall management for both Windows and Linux distros. Also provides a clear view of the security configurations and connections across environments (DMZ, external and internal networks)."
"The visibility in our cloud environment is the most valuable feature."
"Dome9 wraps our FTP infrastructure with its network security configurations, and this also gives us the ability to monitor FTP activity."
"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."
"The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying to do, he proactively takes that as an investigation topic and looks into it. He'll provide the solution even though we might not have asked him to investigate it."
"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."
"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."
"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."
"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."
"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."
"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"In addition to our telecom and Slack channels, it would be helpful to receive Cloud Native Security security notifications in Microsoft Teams."
"The main area for improvement I want to see is for the platform to become less resource-intensive. Right now, it can slow down processes on the machine, and it would be a massive improvement if it were more lightweight than it currently is."
"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"The recommended actions aren't always specific, so it might suggest recommendations that don't apply to the particular infrastructure code I'm reviewing."
"I would like additional integrations."
"The reporting has a lot of opportunities to continuously improve so that we can continue to show value."
"In general, for the product to be successful, they need to improve security, and configuration detection."
"I would like to see improvements in the vulnerability assessments in terms of how the solution discovers vulnerabilities or compromised workloads. Also, customizable reports would be nice."
"We have had some issues with the performance. In some cases, the performance of CloudGuard CNAPP is impacted. Particularly during the intensive security scans in high-traffic environments, there has been a performance impact."
"Reporting should have more options."
"Automation and advanced threat prevention have room for improvement."
"The biggest thing is the documentation aspect of Dome9 is a little lacking. They were purchased by Check Point about a year and a half to two years ago. When they integrated into Check Point's support system, a lot of the documentation that they had previously got mangled in the transition, e.g., linking to stuff on the Dome9 website that no longer exists. There are still a lot of spaces with incomplete links and stuff that is not as fully explained as it could be."
"Check Point must provide a multi-cloud facility where AWS, Azure, and GCP can seamlessly work together and display posture in an integrated manner."
"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."
"The dashboard could be more simple and show the more important issues that are detected first. We'd like to be able to set it up so more important issues show up more prominently in the dashboard."
"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."
"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."
"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."
"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."
"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."
"Reporting can definitely be better. Live dashboards should be configurable for a longer period of time rather than 30 days. Being able to go back in time to compare six months ago to today would be valuable."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 4th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 64 reviews while Sysdig Secure is ranked 13th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 9 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Sysdig Secure is rated 8.2. 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 Sysdig Secure writes "A security scanning tool with great insight on your workloads running anywhere". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Trend Vision One - Cloud Security, whereas Sysdig Secure is most compared with Wiz, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Falco, SUSE NeuVector and Qualys VMDR. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Sysdig Secure report.
See our list of best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.
