AWS Control Tower vs. Check Point CloudGuard vs. SharePass

We were wanting to prove the concept of a low touch process for quickly spinning up boilerplate AWS environments. We were able to get started quickly and to ensure that the AWS Well-Architected Framework principles were followed - at least upfront - however, we found that for our use case and expertise level it ultimately wasn't a fit. We have the skills on our team to manage more of this on our own. My recommendation would be contingent on what skills are already available on your team: if you can "do it yourself" you might as well so that you don't pay for resources you don't need and you have finer grain control over what's created.

Incentivized

Checkpoint Cloud Guard Native Security Platform is much better in native cloud infra security requirements. It works well, and the manageability of said product is good. But If you are having some hybrid kind of environment, it is not suitable, and the products have more complexity to deploy. There are so many other players to do well in this segment.

Incentivized

• Easily create new AWS accounts.
• Easily secure and manage AWS accounts.
• Landing zone with SSO is a huge win for larger teams.

Incentivized

• Advanced Threat protection via Check Point CloudGuard proven ThreatCloud intelligence feeds for malicious IP's is a nice feature.
• We have not set up the cloud bots auto-remediation functionality yet, but from initial testing, it looks to be something worth utilizing.
• Having reporting tie in's with our ServiceNow asset management platform is very handy.

Incentivized

• The AWS SSO GUI is not very intuitive and determining how to apply policies to users without creating redundant logins has been a challenge.
• The default guardrails do not fully encompass all the security checks that we needed.
• There does not appear to be any way to control roles at the IAM level from the control tower account through the GUI.
• Some features on AWS accounts still require logging into the individual account with the root user and cannot be done from AWS Control Tower.

Incentivized

• Support Services - Support during implementation
• Proof-of-concept - Needs to more detailed
• Troubleshooting multi-cloud/ vendor issues
• Should contain all the compliance standards - NIST, HIPPA, FedRAMP

Incentivized

There is no way to easily close an AWS account whether it was created manually or via the AWS Control Tower. It takes too many steps to close it vs to provision a new AWS account

Incentivized

Is easy to use, and the standad configuration is well prepared.

Incentivized

Checkpoint support is great. They provide great SLAs and they comply with service times accordingly.

Incentivized

Using AWS Systems Manager and other slightly lower level components has been helpful for us to manage parts of our AWS presence at a more granular level than AWS Control Tower was designed for. It's not at all an apples-to-apples comparison as they solve different use cases, but for us, the use case associated with AWS Systems Manager was a better fit for our specific needs and skillsets. We did not need everything that AWS Control Tower was doing for us.

Incentivized

Most products have their pros and cons but Dome9 does everything Evident.io and Redlock can do and more. Evident was a good tool but merging the two products into one complicated things.

Incentivized

• Less time manually deploying accounts which was error prone.
• Central logging allowed us to have 1 place to view logs.

Incentivized

• Significant $$$ cost savings as compared to other competitors in the market
• Long term contracting also helped in cost savings and good ROI - 750k USD approx
• Multi-vendor and Multi-cloud capabilities also helped us forecast the capex well
• No need of any other IAM solution - Some cost savings in that area as well for us,

Incentivized