In summary, while Juniper vSRX is praised for its security features, performance, and integration capabilities, users have highlighted areas for improvement such as usability and interface issues. On the other hand, CloudGuard Network Security is appreciated for its firewall capabilities, user-friendly interface, and excellent customer support, but users have suggested enhancements in integration, setup process, and advanced threat intelligence features. Overall, both products offer valuable network security solutions with their unique strengths and weaknesses.
The summary above is based on 82 interviews we conducted recently with Juniper vSRX and CloudGuard Network Security users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The wireless control is helpful."
"Initial setup is straightforward. There weren't too many issues with setting it up. It takes one hour or so."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"Easy to implement, and it is also reliable."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a security device. It can optimize security on the networks of a company. It actually protects the company from attacks from outside. With FortiGate, you can categorize the users. You can create a group of users that can access all of the websites for their work. You can limit other users' access."
"We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"It is useful for protecting and segregating the internal networks from the internet. Most of our customers also use the FortiGate client to connect to their offices by using the VPN client, and of course, they usually activate the antivirus, deep inspection, and intrusion prevention services. They are also using it for web filtering and implementing various policies dealing with forwardings, NAT, etc."
"Fortinet FortiGate has many valuable features, such as IDS, and intrusion detection. It has security features that are in part with the technologies that are available in the market."
"We find all the features valuable, particularly the firewall, application control, URL filtering, and HTTPS detection."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is the increased mail protection including spam."
"It matches what we have on-prem. We kept the same management and the same functionality that we were having on-prem. It has simplified things for us because there is no new dashboard to touch."
"The central management feature is a big plus, allowing us to manage both local and cloud gateways from one platform."
"It is dynamic and agile, and its features and utilities continuously improve and evolve."
"Its blades and VSLS (Virtual System Load Sharing) work fine."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is the ease of use. It was not difficult to learn."
"We are using gateways, and I appreciate the high-availability gateways they have. They stand out more than the competitors."
"There are a few valuable features that offer very good quality on the solution. Especially NetScreen. We used to use NetScreen for the the product line. It was a very mature solution, very robust, easy to configure, easy to manage, etc. It made it easy to do everything."
"It is deployed on the customer site, and we manage the firewalls on this side."
"One of Juniper vSRX's most valuable features is its integration with safety applications. It keeps the software secure from developers without relying on third-party solutions."
"It's a very powerful solution and the firewalls offer high performance"
"I'm told the solution is the fastest, and, so far, I do find that to be the case."
"The most valuable features are application filtering, content filtering, the intrusion prevention system (IPS), and definitely the application firewall."
"We like the solution’s protocol and its dashboard system."
"The command feature is valuable."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"The pricing could always be better."
"Fortigate's hardware capacities could be improved."
"It should come integrated or have its own type of network monitor tool in a module. There should just be one package, and you are good to go."
"I would like some automated custom reporting."
"I feel that the reporting needs to be improved."
"The user interface could be improved to make it less confusing and easier to set up."
"The solution could be more evenly structured."
"Having a web UI in the VSX (or something similar) would be nice."
"If you compare the GUI with the Palo Alto and Forcepoint in the Cisco, they're very easy. Check Point, due to its design, is a little bit complex. They should make the GUI easy to use so that anyone can understand it easily, like Fortinet's GUI. Many companies end up using Fortinet because the GUI is very easy, and there's no need for training. They just deploy the box and do the configuration."
"At CPX, we heard that we can see all the things on the same platform. That is what we have been asking for, and hopefully, we are going to start seeing it this year."
"We have the product deployed on Azure China. One crucial concern is the version limitation; unfortunately, in Azure China, we are restricted to running version R80. Our architecture has a Load Balancer, VMSS CloudGuard, etc. The duplication in this setup prevents the application from seeing the original client IP. This poses a problem for certain applications that require the original IP for login purposes. Although we managed a workaround with a different architecture involving a WAF, it is not as straightforward as the standard Azure setup."
"The API integration is complex, which is an area that should be improved."
"I want the upgrades of their CloudGuard solution to major versions to be easier. We have had a few small hiccups. They have different types of cloud clusters called Geo Clusters, and those just cannot be upgraded past a certain point, which is a hurdle that we are currently experiencing."
"The only pain points we have had with it were when we did major version upgrades. Rather than being able to do incremental upgrades on those, we had to completely redeploy. I know that has changed recently, but we had some hiccups when we did the upgrades. This is the only issue we have had."
"CloudGuard Network Security could be improved in the area of upgrading in place."
"The GUI really needs a lot of work, and it has got worse with successive version updates."
"The biggest downside of Juniper vSRX is its pricing, which may be too high for smaller organizations. While it's a decent solution, the cost may limit its accessibility to smaller customers."
"The GUI interface needs improvement."
"I would like to see an activity sensor for malicious content or sensor for viruses and malware."
"The user interface could always be better. They could make it simpler and more intuitive."
"It is pretty complex to manage and could be easier."
"The solution could improve its technical support."
"he stability could be improved."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 121 reviews while Juniper vSRX is ranked 24th in Firewalls with 33 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Juniper vSRX is rated 7.8. 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 Juniper vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with VMware NSX, Azure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Cisco Secure Firewall and OPNsense. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Juniper vSRX report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors.
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.