Redlock from Prisma 

Conformity from Trend Micro

Auquasec 

We evaluated other options, among which Prisma Cloud and Orca Security.

We evaluated Orca and Wiz. We are a value-added reseller, so we do sell them. Wiz has a lot of good and competitive aspects to CloudGuard features, but CloudGuard is very competitive with them, and we are deep partners, so we lean towards that.

We evaluated all the firewalls including Juniper and Cisco.

We did not explore other options. We are just leveraging what CloudGuard has.

We evaluated Palo Alto Prisma Cloud and Twistlock. Back then, the solution was owned by an independent company called Dome9, and Check Point acquired them. It had the best rule set out there. We chose it because it had all the rule sets out of the box and supported GCP, Azure, and AWS. 

We evaluated many options on the market, such as Fortinet, Sophos, and Cisco NGFW. However, Check Point had better features.

We initially evaluated Palo Alto's cloud security posture management solution but ultimately chose CloudGuard CNAPP due to its faster implementation process and cohesive reporting capabilities. CloudGuard CNAPP's simplicity and comprehensive reporting aligned better with our need for efficient deployment and intuitive data analysis, making it the preferred solution for our cloud security requirements.

N/A

We evaluated RedLock from Prisma (Palo Alto) and Conformity (Trend Micro).

We looked at Wiz, and we looked at Orca. Prisma was our incumbent, but ultimately, we picked Check Point based on the outcomes we were able to get in our proof of concept, and we felt that the support was much better.

We evaluated other options, such as McAfee and Trend Security solutions. 

We evaluated other tools like Rapid7, Qualys, and AWS native security tools, as well as Azure native security tools.

We evaluated Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Micro Cloud One Conformity.

Normally, the policies are accessible only on the browsers, e.g., if you compile them from Prisma Cloud, they're available as a part of a browser. However, for management users, especially for CIOs and CTOs, it becomes difficult for them to type URLs, then login. In the case of Dome9, they provide an app. With that app, you can directly login with single sign-on. It is much easier to access using the app compared to the browser option.

Most things are the same for all three providers. The major difference between Dome9 and Prisma is the IAM roles. The maturity of IAM roles available in Dome9 are much better than the other two solutions. Currently, our focus is mostly on what is happening and who is making the changes in the environment. Another thing is the visibility that Dome9 provides through its intel is better than the other two solutions.

The other two solutions have system capabilities better than Check Point.

I would recommend Prisma as well as Dome9 because they both have the visibility. In our case, the IAM was a critical piece of our requirements.

I evaluated several products. I settled on Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence based on their reliable services.

We looked at other solutions, but with CloudGuard everything is located in the cloud. It's very convenient for us to manage our assets in the cloud.

We did not evaluate other options.

We do not evaluate other options. We wanted to continue implementing the same brand since the other products have helped us a lot in the security of our company.

Check Point was the first solution we used. It was recommended by third parties.

We evaluated Palo Alto and Cisco however, they forced us through Check Point at the company.

We negotiated with other service providers. The best bid came from Check Point.

We did not evaluate other options. 

I did evaluate another tool initially. I cannot recall the name but it had ".io" after it. Ultimately, we decided not to use it because it only had the compliance component and it was more expensive.

The native cloud security controls provided by the cloud vendors, when it comes to features like transparency and customization, are very weak. That's why you need CloudGuard. On their own, I would rate the native cloud security controls a four out of ten. They are complex, and the biggest issue is that it's difficult to secure if you want to centralize your security operation.

When maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds using CloudGuard, versus using native cloud security controls, I find that it is much better. It's the same interface in CloudGuard, regardless of the cloud. Of course, your firewall administrator still needs to have knowledge of what he's doing. That doesn't change. The important point is that the interface is much better and it doesn't change between cloud environments.

We evolved various CSPM tools such as PAN, TRELIX, and Fortinet, however, our management opted to install CloudGuard as a strategic step.

When looking at the native cloud security controls provided by our cloud vendors, when it comes to features like transparency and customization, I would give full credit to Dome9. If the  cloud vendors did offer what Dome9 is offering, we would not be using Dome9. We use Dome9 because of the features it offers.

As for maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds, it depends. If I have one account, it will take me the same amount of time to do it, whether in Dome9 or directly on the cloud vendor's portal. But if I have, say, five AWS accounts and I want to implement a change, I would have to do it five times to those five different accounts. In Dome9, I can do it one time for all five accounts.

We did look at other vendors' solutions, in addition to Dome9. Back then, the FQDN was compatible and that was one of the main features that pushed us to select Dome9.

I did not check other products.

We were in rush, and we did not hae enough time to evaluate other products in the market.

When we were comparing Prisma or Pallos, we found that CloudGuard CNAPP offered a more comprehensive range of tools and configuration management settings. It appeared to be a more mature product with a broader scope of capabilities.

This is the best platform that I have worked with.

We chose Check Point as it provides integrated and centralized security, improving the effectiveness of security reviews.

We previously validated some solutions. However, the features of Check Point CloudGuard were better suited to our requirements.

The other options are not as powerful as this solution.

We didn't evaluate other solutions or vendors. We were impressed with the demo and PoC that we received.

While other vendors do have tools that are pretty good, the thing which we run into is that we have multiple cloud environments. Also, even within the cloud environments themselves, there are a lot of the tools but they are not as streamlined as the one that Dome9 offers. Dome9 pulls everything together into a single pane of glass for you.

I love the work involved in maintaining and scaling security services and configurations across multiple public clouds using this solution, versus using native native cloud security controls. It is so much better. The different cloud platforms all have their own way that they handle a lot of the stuff that Dome9 handles. Even within their platform, they are in a lot of disparate places, e.g., in AWS, there are five different tools. You have to jump between them to get the same information that you can just pull in automatically on Dome9, which is just one platform. We are using multiple platforms, so that makes it even more complicated and time consuming if you had to just rely on them to get all of your information. Whereas, it's all just summarized and put together on the Dome9 end.

We continuously evaluate various options and manufacturers, however, on its own merits, the Check Point solution became our first choice.

This tool is centralized with the Infinity Check Point Portal. This, with the other Check Point tools that we handle, is excellent for administration.

We validated this along with some other tools. We did not have the same confidence that Check Point provided due to its prestige, its characteristics, and its comments.

We always value various issues such as centralized environments, costs, and support, among other details to make the best decision. Even so, with this validation, the best option for our company is Check Point.

Before implementing this solution, we validated solutions from other manufacturers such as Fortinet and Cisco. However, the benefits provided by Check Point exceeded the validations, and we chose CloudGuard.

We always carry out concept tests with partners first to uncover cost validation, among other aspects, before making a decision.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing Dome9.

They didn't find many other competitors for this type of domain and security tool.

The cloud providers give you the tools for their solutions to be secure, but they aren't easy to implement nor are they clear how to use because each tool that we have has its own security measures. This solution provides clarity for what you need to do to be secure in one centralized tool.

No, we did not evaluate other options before adopting Dome9.

We evaluated native AWS features and a competitor, Evident.io, but found that Dome9 was able to do all of what we needed in one tool instead of two.

We evaluated Prisma Cloud, however, we found many of the features that we won't be using we would still be paying for unnecessarily.

We were evaluating several options before choosing Check Point. What we identified would be important aspects of the new provider were: simplicity in the installation and 360 vision of all our infrastructure. When we were evaluating, we looked at Palo Alto, Check Point, and Cloud Security.

In addition to evaluating Dome9 and Palo Alto Prisma, we are considering Qualys, as well as a customized solution by Security Compass.

One of our customers is also using Check Point CloudGuard, which we are trying to replace with Dome9.

I would like to understand the reporting, how secure the solutions are, and how it can be implemented such that my framework is mapped to those tools.

We evaluated Azure Functions, but for existing Check Point customers, it might be more advantageous from a security standpoint for their operations team to maintain a single pane of glass for their existing on-premises and other cloud provider investments. This would allow them to adopt a multi-cloud approach.

When we did market research five years ago, there were not many alternatives in the market for our purposes. We looked at Kaspersky Lab and Trend Micro but they didn’t address our needs.

We ran a PoC with Dome9 and it was transformed quickly into production.

We evaluated another solution called Evident.io, but it had a lot of overlap with traditional tools, whereas Dome9 was unique in its approach.