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 solution is very, very easy to use."
"It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable."
"User-friendly and affordable security solution that's recommended for SMB customers. This solution has good technical support."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"Our clients choose CloudGuard as a natural progression of their solutions. They understand Microsoft and CloudGuard fits."
"I like the tool's ability to manage cloud traffic locally without routing it through our data centers."
"The security configuration features have enhanced the reliable coordination of programs and data safety."
"The visibility is most valuable. It allows us to see all of our devices from one place, and it gives us the ability to manage push updates and things like that from one place."
"The product has allowed us to develop applications from the cloud - even with large environments and well-segmented security lines."
"We find Check Point valuable because they are 100% focused on security. It totally closes the potential vulnerability channel. We can check our mail and our attachments and we can scan everything easily. We get an immediate report about the situation of the attachments. We can discover if the target's security attack was started from phishing, etc. We also enjoy using the additional features that protect our internal customer from targeted attacks."
"Auto-scaling and zero touch are valuable features."
"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 product’s quality and performance are better than other vendors."
"The most valuable features are application filtering, content filtering, the intrusion prevention system (IPS), and definitely the application firewall."
"The initial setup is pretty simple."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The solution has good features."
"It is easy for me to go in and update settings, make changes, or add/remove rules or security."
"The tool's most valuable features are routing features and service quality."
"The dashboard, customization, API, and pricing are good."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"A sandbox would be good in order to be able to inspect the emails containing spam and be able to validate the emails that contain malware, prior to delivering to the customer."
"It needs more available central management."
"Vulnerability scanning could be improved."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"I think that the infrastructure for the VPN could be improved. The way that it is bundled also made it difficult to use and sell as it is too expensive."
"There are some tiny bugs that sometimes affect the operations. In the past revision of it, there was a bug. Because of the bug, we had to downgrade the version. It happened only with the last revision."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"The product needs to improve support. They don't consider my case the number one priority even though I want a quick resolution."
"The price of the solution could be reduced, it is expensive."
"The solution could improve to have a DLP feature."
"Improvements needed include better integration with Azure features to match on-premises capabilities."
"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."
"The initial deployment using the ARM template in Azure was straightforward, but migrating to Terraform added complexity, although we managed to make it work."
"We did not use the AWS Transit Gateway, and that's one of the things that we're currently using. I believe we will be working with Check Point again, in the near future, to implement it, once they start having proper support for a single customer with multiple accounts. When we were using them, we had to install Check Point on each and every single account."
"The initial setup is complex and could be made simpler."
"The tool's basic license does not cover everything. It needs to improve visibility and availability."
"he stability could be improved."
"The reporting can be improved."
"The solution should consider improving its licensing policies."
"It could use more tutorials."
"The security feature must be improved."
"Right now, we are going through issues and problems where the product gets dropped with the connection or during the authentication initial phase. While it could be our problem, we would like to see more stability in this area."
"There are too many types of licenses, which can be confusing."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 119 reviews while Juniper vSRX is ranked 26th in Firewalls with 30 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 "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". 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 Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Cisco Secure Firewall and Zscaler Cloud Firewall. 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.
