We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Check Point DDoS Protector based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The stability is okay and we have not encountered problems with the solution."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"With real-time packet capture features, you can easily and quickly response."
"Valuable features include simple and centralized management of user access and capabilities, as well as Web 2.0 interactive attack alerting, traffic visualization, and mitigation service control."
"The most valuable features include the traffic categorization and control of the traffic. The filtering of the traffic is very precise. When you want to stop some traffic, you precisely stop that traffic."
"There are a number of valuable features in this product, like Cloud Signaling and Threat Intelligence feeds."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"There were huge attacks in October, around 62 attacks at 30 gigabits per second, at one of our banks. We used Arbor DDoS to mitigate these attacks, and it performed great."
"Check Point detects and automatically mitigates attacks, which helps our organization protect our infrastructure."
"One of its most outstanding functions is the zero-day DDOS."
"It can be deployed as a hardware appliance, virtual appliance, or as a cloud service."
"This comprehensive tool validates and exploits complex vulnerabilities that other vendors fail to find and resolve to increase security."
"As our business continues to grow, we can grow this product simultaneously."
"Currently, we have fewer incidents with viruses. We improved our IQ operations and security using this solution. Our company's better after using Check Point."
"From my experience, the best part of this solution is behavioral DDoS protection. The DDoS Protector can monitor the traffic, and based on the behavior, it can decide which traffic is malicious and which traffic is regular. It works dynamically, and it's a very good solution."
"The is a really low level of the false-positive alerts (when the clean traffic is marked as DDoS) due to some advanced techniques used by Check Point under the hood."
"The regional support here in African could improve, such as marketing and account managers."
"The upgrade process is mildly complex requiring treatment of the custom embedded OS separately from the application. The correlation of the underling OS to the application version can be easily missed."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"When it comes to some false positives, we need to tweak the system from time to time. There is room for improvement when it comes to the actual mitigation because of some false positives."
"I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"The solution needs to enhance its features to compete with other tools."
"For a long time, there was no software version of R80.10 available for the Check Point DDoS Protector software appliances, and we had to stay on the quite outdated R77.30 version."
"It does not provide the capability to upload data for blacklisting/whitelisting in bulk."
"The solution should greatly improve its interface."
"The Check Point support language is only in English."
"The mitigation part could be improved."
"Check Point DDoS Protector does not provide the ability to upload data for the blacklist/whitelist in bulk, which is one of the big points that need to be improved to facilitate configurations."
"Check Point should develop a DDoS solution because they don't have one and we need to use another solution, in our case, Imperva. This is a problem because we need to have two firewalls. We would like to only have one solution because it would improve the management, we would have fewer incidents, and we wouldn't need to talk to more than one person for support."
"Monitoring and reporting are the things that can be introduced in the future."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Check Point DDoS Protector is ranked 12th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 11 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Check Point DDoS Protector is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Check Point DDoS Protector writes "Good machine learning, low false positives, and great zero-day DDOS protection". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas Check Point DDoS Protector is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare and Fortinet FortiDDoS. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Check Point DDoS Protector report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.