We performed a comparison between Check Point SandBlast Network and Fortinet FortiSandbox based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The sandbox is able to scan files without adding a delay or compromising productivity."
"The Check Point SandBlast Network gives us incredibly good features."
"In terms of the scalability, it's expandable across the cloud."
"SandBlast updates the threat signatures frequently."
"Threat Emulation gives networks the necessary protection against unknown threats in files that are attached to emails. The Threat Emulation engine picks up malware at the exploit phase before it enters the network. It quickly quarantines and runs the files in a virtual sandbox, which imitates a standard operating system, to discover malicious behavior before hackers can apply evasion techniques to bypass the sandbox."
"The zero-day protection is its most valuable feature."
"It saves time with us trying to do the analysis. We use it to try to find out how something got into the network. We use it to stop something before it ever gets in."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point SandBlast Network is the sandboxing of PDF and Microsoft system files."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"You have access to a report as to what behaviors the example file entered in the registry."
"FortiSandbox helps us handle unknown threats. Every vendor is competing for who can detect an unknown threat the fastest. Fortinet is competitive in the market."
"One of the valuable features is its ability to detect new threats."
"What I find most valuable, is that it is easy to use."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox puts suspicious files in quarantine, analyzes for virus risks, and lets them out of quarantine if it detects no risk."
"The real-time analysis capability of FortiSandbox is beneficial for email analysis."
"The dynamic behavior analysis is excellent. We have many attacks caught by the FortiSandbox as zero-day attacks. Additionally, the administration is simple and can be customized to fit your companies needs."
"EDR and EPM solutions like Carbon Black or CyberArk have integrations with the cloud version of Sandblast, however, there must be on-premise Sandblast options also."
"I think Check Point provides standard time which ideally most other vendors take to identify behaviors of a file by sending them into a sandbox environment for inspection."
"We have noticed a slight performance hit when the Threat Emulation and Extraction features were enabled, but the protection trade-off is worth it for us."
"Many Important controls are only available in CLI & very very complicated. All tecli command features should available on GUI so that it will become easy for normal users to monitor & control queue."
"There should be some improvement in the solution's stability and scalability."
"There should be some customized price reductions in the offered packages."
"SandBlast takes longer than FortiSandbox to complete a scan."
"I would like for them to improve the visibility in the product."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiSandbox is complex. You cannot only deploy Fortinet FortiSandbox without deploying the stack of Fortinet solutions. The implementation and integration are challenging tasks with the device and placement in the network. We needed to do POC and offloading testing."
"I would like to have machine learning added to the solution in a future release."
"There could be more templates and a higher number of simulated VMs to configure more use cases. Sometimes we need to configure many use cases in many different environments, and if the number of VMs that we configure is limited, we have to remove some and reconfigure the environment if we need another environment."
"For the MSSPs, it would be great if the product could display all the threat chains on a dashboard since it is an area where the tool is currently lacking."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox should improve its performance and security accuracy to keep competitive with other solutions, such as IBM."
"Most people are confused about how to use the right integration of the right Fortinet product."
"In future releases, I would like to see more automation capabilities."
"The use cases in Fortinet FortiSandbox are not good. It is difficult to upload a custom VM for Fortinet FortiSandbox. The integration of Fortinet FortiSandbox with other Fortinet or FortiGate firewalls is not good. VMs are already installed in the hardware and are working fine, but we tried to approve the custom VM many times but did not succeed."
More Check Point SandBlast Network Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point SandBlast Network is ranked 8th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 33 reviews while Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 4th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 36 reviews. Check Point SandBlast Network is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point SandBlast Network writes "High detection with few false positives and able to handle large volumes of data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". Check Point SandBlast Network is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Cisco Secure Network Analytics, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Trellix Network Detection and Response and Symantec Advanced Threat Protection, whereas Fortinet FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Trellix Network Detection and Response, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Fortinet FortiEDR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics. See our Check Point SandBlast Network vs. Fortinet FortiSandbox report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.
