Check Point CloudGuard vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall (WAF)

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

Imperva web application firewall does a great job in giving us control over access to our public web servers. With our regular hosting provider, we couldn't block access based on geography, or really anything. So we had to rely on traditional access controls to protect the data. But with the WAF, we can block countries such as North Korea, or we could stop any SQL Injection attempts, or even do a temporary block of IP in the case of detected brute-forcing.

• 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

• Alert Aggregation - Correlates different violations into perceived correlated attacks.
• Ease of deployment - as one of the only WAFs that allow bridge mode deployment, this can be deployed with without downtime and no Network Architecture modifications. If the need for proxy is required at a later time, Transparent Reverse Proxy can be deployed within seconds and minimal configuration.
• Custom Policies - Custom security policies are easy to configure.
• Reporting - There are a good amount of pre-configured reports available by default.

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

• The UI can use a little work (but is largely decent)

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

Incentivized

There are just a couple of points that are hard to find, that probably could be elsewhere. But these are minor; everything else is right where you'd expect it to be.

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

Incentivized

We haven't needed support from Imperva since implementation. But during that time, their personnel were very quick to respond to questions. Since then, it's been largely doing its thing for us (which is exactly what we'd hoped).

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

Ultimately, it was the easiest to work with that was still a "known" company (we've been burned too many times by up-and-comers). We needed something that gave us a lot of control but then didn't need its handheld on a daily basis. Imperva gives us a lot of that and we are still able to navigate it with ease.

• 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

• Meet compliance requirements - Check.
• Better Insight into web application - Absolutely great, checks all the traffic against RFC standards and will alert on common development mistakes that duplicate application traffic or provide attack vectors for potential attackers.
• Have had several issues blocking a customer without producing alerts, while it happened only one week out of 2 years of working with the devices, it did produce a lot of headaches.

Incentivized