We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration and Cisco Secure Workload based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Email security has improved since we deployed this platform."
"The product is a fairly complete and centralized solution accessible through the Infinity Portal."
"Check Point's technical support is very good."
"I like the fact that having granular information about the potential threats is received in email."
"The API is its most valuable feature. On the API side, relative to the rest of the market, Check Point is decades ahead of its competitors."
"The solution has a very effective anti-phishing algorithm that detects a significantly higher number of phishing emails compared to the default Microsoft solution."
"The anti-phishing feature is the solution's best feature."
"We are able to protect sensitive business data and maintain regulatory compliance with advanced data leak prevention (DLP)."
"It's stable."
"The solution offers 100% telemetry coverage. The telemetry you collect is not sampled, it's not intermittent. It's complete. You see everything in it, including full visibility of all activities on your endpoints and in your network."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don't have to do packet captures on the network."
"Scalability is its most valuable feature."
"Instead of proving that all the access control lists are in place and all the EPGs are correct, we can just point the auditor to a dashboard and point out that there aren't any escaped conversations. It saves an enormous, enormous amount of time."
"The product offers great visibility into the network so we can enforce security measures."
"Generally speaking, Cisco support is considered one of the best in the networking products and stack."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is security."
"Some files are not scanned thoroughly due to occasional network failures."
"Stability has been a pain point. I was going back and forth with my product engineer and project manager for a couple of months. I had the product in a demonstration mode and wasn't satisfied with the results initially. After a few alterations and a few revisions later, it is fine."
"At this time, the two-factor authentication does not work for Active Directory."
"We understand that false positives are always there, but sometimes the notifications are more than expected."
"Check Point Infinity Portal sometimes feels a bit slow, and there are performance issues that should be easy to fix."
"A signature-based filter could improve the solution's AI model for spam email."
"There are sometimes leakages of viruses when the system is experiencing network failures."
"Other vendor support teams go after fixing the issue the moment that they join the remote session. The problem that I have faced with Check Point support is that they share the case number with me, then it takes at least two days for them to join a remote session with us, even though we have asked for this timeframe to change. Even though we have already explained the problems that we are facing or the business pain points in our network on the call or email, we have to repeat the problem statements again in the console. It can take four or five days to resolve the issue from the moment they understand the problem. This includes the time to teach their R&D or internal team whatever the issue is. I have faced timeframes as long as seven to 10 days for fixing some issues."
"It is not so easy to use and configure. It needs a bunch of further resources to work, which is mainly the biggest downside of it. The deployment is huge."
"It has an uninviting interface."
"There was a controversy when Cisco reduced the amount of data they kept, and the solution became quite cost-intensive, which made its adoption challenging….Although they have modified it now, I preferred the previous version, and I wish all the functionality were back under the same product."
"The interface is really helpful for technical people, but it is not user-friendly."
"The integration could be better, especially with different types of solutions."
"They should scale down the hardware a bit. The initial hardware investment is two million dollars so it's a price point problem. The issue with the price comes from the fact that you have to have it with enormous storage and enormous computes."
"I'd like to see better documentation for advanced features. The documentation is fairly basic. I would also like to see better integration with other applications."
"The product must be integrated with the cloud."
More Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is ranked 9th in CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) with 47 reviews while Cisco Secure Workload is ranked 20th in CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) with 13 reviews. Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is rated 8.8, while Cisco Secure Workload is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration writes "Has a user-friendly dashboard, a great anti-phishing algorithm, and sandboxing for testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Workload writes "A solution that provides good technical support but its high cost makes it challenging for users to adopt it". Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Avanan, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Mimecast Email Security, whereas Cisco Secure Workload is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Nutanix Flow Network Security. See our Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration vs. Cisco Secure Workload report.
See our list of best CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) vendors.
We monitor all CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) 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.