We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Symantec Data Center Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud and Data Center Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool's most valuable features are IPS and blades. These features are valuable for security."
"The solution is easier to manage than an on-premise firewall. It is easy to manage. The use of dynamic objects for these gateways made it easy to create the right rules and the right policies. Integration with Azure is also easy where we have to just add the subnets. In an on-premise setup, we have to add everything from scratch. We can automate a lot of actions."
"This software is great in overall performance since it can locate any trouble across the networking system and provide solutions before it affects workflows."
"We are using gateways, and I appreciate the high-availability gateways they have. They stand out more than the competitors."
"The IPS, application and URL filtering, as well as Identity Awareness, are all very valuable features."
"Workflows across the company ecosystem have can flow smoothly without experiencing any challenges."
"The program is very stable."
"The solution has been quite stable."
"The granularity of applying the policies is valuable."
"The monitoring in the management console allows us to find out what is going wrong, and it gets reports even before the user reports it."
"The real strength lies in its straightforward approach, offering just two key policies: prevention and detection."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint protection system."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console, which can handle different products that we have."
"The advantage of Data Center Security is its ease of use and that it serves as a single unified platform, where I can apply all my security policies to protect that server."
"The tool will then detect any anomalies, such as an intruder who has breached the network, which can trigger the system lockdown feature if it's enabled and meets the defined threshold."
"The ability to finely control permissions and restrictions on servers or assets through a customizable rule set is a key strength."
"I think they have pretty much mastered what can be done. There are some nuances like when you fail over from one cluster member to the other, the external IP address takes about two minutes to fail over."
"I hope that Check Point continues to improve its technical documentation regarding the Check Point CloudGuard IaaS gateway and management system."
"The cost needs improvement as it is currently quite expensive."
"In case the device is inaccessible due to some issue such as CPU or memory, there is no separate port or hardware partition provided for troubleshooting purposes."
"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."
"For major upgrades, it's still necessary to destroy the VMs and re-create them again. Doing that would mean new public IPs as well."
"The API integration is complex, which is an area that should be improved."
"Regarding CloudGuard Network Security's integration with various resources like application gateways and application-based security groups, there's room for exploring dynamic access in those areas. A significant concern is the upgrade process. Unlike an in-place upgrade, upgrading the tool in Azure requires deploying a new resource, which can be hectic and less reliable. We have to spend something new to have the tool's latest version."
"There is plenty of room for improvement with this product, and it could start with platform metrics."
"Could have better reporting capabilities and better support."
"This solution clashes with Microsoft defender, which results in performance degradation on the machine."
"They need to develop a more flexible product that can be scaled such that it fits well into a small business or a bigger, enterprise-level solution."
"The product blocks certain processes, even after allowlisting them."
"Agent management is a challenging task."
"The support is very bad. They're not fast at all. Trend Micro's support is much better."
"Adding more compatibility with common products like Microsoft would be a plus."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Data Center Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 119 reviews while Symantec Data Center Security is ranked 11th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 11 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Symantec Data Center Security is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Data Center Security writes "A robust solution that provides comprehensive protection for data centers, offering agentless security, powerful intrusion prevention, and a wide range of security features". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, whereas Symantec Data Center Security is most compared with Trend Micro Deep Security, Symantec Endpoint Security, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Symantec Data Center Security report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.
