Overall, users find CloudGuard Network Security to excel in robust firewall capabilities, user-friendly interface, advanced threat prevention, pricing transparency, and satisfactory ROI. On the other hand, Hillstone E-Series is praised for its quick installation, exceptional performance, robust security features, affordability, positive ROI, and excellent customer support. However, users noted that CloudGuard has better integration, setup process, and user interface, while Hillstone users find the interface navigation challenging with limited customization options and delayed updates.
The summary above is based on 74 interviews we conducted recently with CloudGuard Network Security and Hillstone E-Series users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"FortiGate firewalls are easy to manage through a user-friendly web interface. They also have advanced features like DDoS and DLP. However, I wouldn't recommend enabling all of these features on one device because it can cause performance issues."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"The Fortinet FortiGate local partners were good. I did not have direct contact with Fortinet support."
"The wireless control is helpful."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"The solution is stable."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"Customers want to load balance more than eight lines or six internet lines. FortiGate is the only solution that can accomplish this."
"Security effectiveness is the most valuable feature. Operational efficiency, reporting, and support are also good."
"It was very easy to install the solution, and the architecture meant we didn't have to worry about exceeding the solution's capacity."
"Monitoring using SmartConsole and all its features is extremely easy, and I find SmartEvent an excellent monitoring tool for spotting threats and user behaviour."
"Now, we can filter which websites users can access and block categories that are a risk. For example, we can block social media and gambling sites. This has helped to decrease the risk of access to malicious content on the internet."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is threat prevention."
"The product gives analytic reports."
"The notifications, the visibility, and the deployment are the most valuable. It could be packaged in such a way that it took a lot of time and resources off our hands, so it was more efficient."
"Very reliable solution with good scalability and straightforward implementation."
"The most valuable feature of the Hillstone E-Series is its user-friendliness."
"The installation is easy, we have not had any complaints from our customers."
"This solution has two main features that we find very valuable; a threat-intelligence option, and a web/application filtering option. The technical support team are very good and very quick."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It only took a few hours to deploy."
"Working with the Hillstone E-Series has, from a remote perspective, allowed me to give my clients a secure connectivity."
"The most valuable features of the Hillstone E-Series are its hardware capacity, innovation, and the throughput that the hardware can take."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Improvement is needed in the Web Filter quotas to restrict users with allocated quotas."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution. However, my issue is the performance only. When I use all the profiles, this affects the performance. From the beginning, I should have had a better sizing of the box."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"Web security solutions can be improved."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve the user interface. There should be more functionality and options through the GUI."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"Check Point could show us use cases that would help us in Czech and could help us with security threats in our specific country."
"We have Microsoft CASB cloud app security and it's one of the least compatible firewalls. They really need to look at this, as both Check Point and Microsoft are major players. Why aren't they compatible? If we had Palo Alto then we wouldn't have this problem."
"There is room for improvement in the integration with PaaS services from the public cloud. It would be very helpful."
"The documentation could be much better."
"CloudGuard functions just like any other firewall. It functions very well. The only thing that could maybe be improved would be to integrate some tools that are not integrated with the SmartConsole, like the SmartView Monitor that we need to open on a different application to access."
"Improvements needed include better integration with Azure features to match on-premises capabilities."
"It's meeting our needs at this time. If I could make it better, it would be by making it more standalone. That would be beneficial to us. I say that because our current platform for virtualization is VMware. The issue isn't any fault of Check Point, it's more how the virtualization platform partners allow for that partnership and integration. There has to be close ties and partnerships between the vendors to ensure interoperability and sup-portability. There is only so far that Check Point, or any security vendor technology can go without the partnership and enablement of the virtualization platform vendor as it relies on "Service Insertion" to maintain optimal performance."
"CloudGuard Network Security needs to include new features. One specific feature I would like to see is the ability to protect external resources using single sign-on integration with various identity providers, including custom identity providers. Its pricing could also be cheaper."
"The tool needs to improve its price."
"Having frequent live webinars on a monthly basis would really help."
"Support from Hillstone E-Series has a shortcoming that needs improvement."
"The tool provides just a general report. It does not provide a granular report. Hence, the tool should work on its reporting feature."
"The current usage reporting is very basic."
"I am not sure if this solution offers active directory integration. Adding that feature will definitely be an advantage."
"The solution doesn't have a web proxy built into the system like Sophos. This is something they should work to change."
"SSL VPN license cost is not cheap."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 119 reviews while Hillstone E-Series is ranked 33rd in Firewalls with 9 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Hillstone E-Series is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Hillstone E-Series writes "A user-friendly and marketable solution with a virtual switching capability". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Hillstone E-Series is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, OpenVPN Access Server, Netgate pfSense and Meraki MX. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Hillstone E-Series report.
See our list of best Firewalls 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.
