We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The solution is highly scalable because they have devices that can handle a large amount of traffic."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"Easy to implement, and it is also reliable."
"The product is very stable, easy to troubleshoot, and configure, so it has reduced the time it takes for support."
"The interface is very user-friendly and I like it very much."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"The most useful functionality of Fortinet FortiGate is the user interface, multiple engines, and their cloud with the latest integrations. Additionally, the Security Fabric tool is very good."
"The scalability of Fortinet FortiGate is good."
"Our clients choose CloudGuard as a natural progression of their solutions. They understand Microsoft and CloudGuard fits."
"We primarily secure our network using CloudGuard Network Security's next-generation firewall features, including anti-spam, IPS, and URL filtering. Our chosen package for the go-to-market strategy is NGTP. For customers seeking more features, we provide options to upgrade to the tool's advanced packages."
"The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support."
"One of the main characteristics that Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has given us is granularity and visibility."
"It was very easy to install the solution, and the architecture meant we didn't have to worry about exceeding the solution's capacity."
"The central management feature is a big plus, allowing us to manage both local and cloud gateways from one platform."
"The tool's most valuable features are inspecting internet traffic and IPS. We can manage the firewall using shared policies from a single management server."
"As per the solution's blade design, there are many options. For example, you have to buy a UTM blade and an advanced malware blade, etc. If the blade license is there, we can configure from the firewall GUI."
"The technical support is good."
"With this product, we receive the best monitoring and reports."
"Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones has improved my organization."
"The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall."
"The way that the solution quickly updates to adjust to threats is the solution's most valuable aspect. When there's a security attack, within five minutes, all Wildfire subscribers have access to updates so that all systems will be safe. Its threat prevention is way better than other vendor products."
"The solution is completely integrated with all the other Palo Alto products. I think that it is the best part for endpoint protection. The firewall features include URL and DNS filtering, threat protection, and antivirus."
"What I like about Palo Alto is that it is a complete product, with everything in it."
"The graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure."
"I would like to see improvements with the antivirus and IPS as they are not working properly all the time."
"The sniffing packets or packet captures, can be simplified and improved because it's a little confusing."
"Improvement is needed in the Web Filter quotas to restrict users with allocated quotas."
"Its price could be better."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"Lacks sufficient security options."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve the user interface. There should be more functionality and options through the GUI."
"The updates Fortinet provides are sometimes unstable."
"This application can be more integrated with web application firewalls. Better integrations would provide more granularity, which would be helpful for focusing on the application itself and preventing attacks. It would be good to include the cross-domain search. If you have multiple firewalls that are managed on the same platform and you want to check who is using some particular objects or where a specific ID is being used, it should provide an option for this kind of search instead of having to check one by one on each firewall."
"The solution needs to improve the interruptions that happen during gateway upgrades."
"Zero touch removes any independence for configuring."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could improve by making it easier to configure."
"It needs to cover additional kinds of infrastructure, like containers and serverless options. It's somewhat limited in that area."
"I haven't used CloudGuard Network Security in the past couple of years as I moved out of the network security role. However, based on my previous experience, there were improvements, especially in in-place upgrades. Regarding cost, it might be potentially cheaper considering resource utilization in Azure and VM costs, but licensing could be improved, possibly moving towards a simpler model."
"Check Point has a history of moving fast with software release and upgrade cycles which are difficult to keep up with at times."
"The complexity to deploy should be decreased."
"The deployment model could be better."
"Many years back an update caused an issue with the firewall. However, Palo Alto not only informed us of said issue, they also sent an update that fixed the issue before I even had time to log in to determine if the issue affected our services."
"Our main concern is that everything has to be synced with the WildFire Cloud and has to be checked through the subscription."
"The cost of the solution is excessively high."
"They provide a medium level of technical support."
"It's not really their problem, it's a problem across the board. There will always be problems with interrupted traffic. We have to set it up where we're playing a middle man game where we're stripping it out, looking at it, and then putting it back together and sending it on its way. That requires CPU cycles. And there's some overhead with that."
"The product fails to offer protection when dealing with high-severity vulnerabilities, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The GUI is better in 8.0, but I still feel it lacks the fast response most of us desire. Logs are much quicker."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 121 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "Highly reliable, great visibility, and centralized management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Check Point SandBlast Network.
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.