We performed a comparison between Check Point Web Gateway and Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks and others in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)."The solution is stable."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"SmartConsole is intuitive."
"The stability of the tool is very good."
"The product's best feature is observing how the traffic flows from one gateway to another. It's convenient for checking specific details, and you can manage everything centrally."
"It filters the URLs by reputation, denying access to those proven to be harmful and inspecting those which haven't been flagged yet to detect threats before the user can enter it."
"One of its rather outstanding capabilities is its ability to add an extra layer of protection to our company's internal network."
"It's easy to deploy this tool."
"It offers good security and we use it when we want to implement the best security in an organization due to the fact that it gives us broader visibility."
"The interface is simply amazing."
"With the model we have, we are able to scale very easily if we need to."
"The most valuable feature is blocklisting. It's good at what I like to describe as the "silly side cases." We have this annoying security architecture that says we must do this, that, and the other, so we try to make it easier on ourselves."
"Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense furthers the existing security posture rather than replacing or trying to replace any existing products."
"When it comes to helping to detect DNS threats, BloxOne is good on all fronts. The number of false positives is very low, close to none. More than once it has detected new names or lookalike names and protected us and saved us from bad characters."
"Our ability to detect data exfiltration was minimal before Infoblox and the cloud portal was instituted for us. In terms of DNS security as a whole, we had some capability with our firewalls, but this is a lot more specialized because we're sending all of our DNS requests to Infoblox. I'd say we improved 100%."
"BloxOne provides automatic sharing of network context data, which affects our speed of threat response and provide real-time threat intelligence. Our security operations needs this to do their work. It makes us feel safer."
"The reporting ability is helpful. It allows us to control what our users are able to resolve, and then be able to see reports on that."
"Infoblox has helped us improve in the way that we look at data as it comes in and out. We monitor and manage queries from every device that sits inside our company, e.g., every user, every laptop, and every query. When you type something into the web, Infoblox will scan or manage that. If it is going somewhere bad, then it will block them. From a metrics perspective, it gives us data, letting us go back and find those impacted or infected clients to either clean their devices or remove them from the network."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The support must be faster."
"We understand that if we want to see greater connections, greater services, and a greater capacity established for primary equipment, this solution needs to evolve to make an application installed directly on equipment."
"Perhaps the latency in the administrative part of the portal would be a point of improvement."
"I would like to be able to see an integration with centralized management services."
"It is not user-friendly."
"Check Point Web Gateway could add an end point access function."
"For the most modern versions, there currently is no documentation, or it is more difficult to find it."
"The support team’s response is not fast."
"Endpoint solutions need to improved."
"The product could be cheaper."
"A lot of their documentation needs improvement."
"Within the past two years, we discovered certain bugs in their products. The resolution of these bugs took a little too much time, especially if our production environment is down for a certain amount of time, then we are losing money. That is hard to convey to Infoblox support, e.g., we actually need the system up and running again within two or three hours. The awareness of these so-called production down incidents is not really easy to convey."
"The product is slightly more expensive compared to other DNS solutions."
"This is not just Infoblox, this could be any portal provider, cloud provider, sometimes they change the look of the customer-facing options and it's not completely clear why they make the change."
"We would like to see more reporting capabilities that are now offered only with the on-premises reporting appliance."
"The onboarding is a little rough at times, and you need to have some information at hand. It is pretty good, but it would be useful to have a few good examples to set up things like data exfiltration."
More Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Web Gateway is ranked 12th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 20 reviews while Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense is ranked 6th in Domain Name System (DNS) Security with 15 reviews. Check Point Web Gateway is rated 8.2, while Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Web Gateway writes "Great for limiting, blocking, or allowing access to sites". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense writes "Improved the way that we look at data as it comes in and out". Check Point Web Gateway is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, Symantec Proxy and Cisco Web Security Appliance, whereas Infoblox BloxOne Threat Defense is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security, Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection, Zscaler Internet Access and Fortinet FortiGate SWG.
We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.