We need central management for our policy, monitoring, and different day-to-day administrative tasks, so Check Point Security Management fits all the requirements for our needs. As we know, Check Point Security Management can be used for central policy management. It is an all-in-one management system. We can manage firewalling, application control, URL filtering, IPS, Anti-Bot, and Threat Emulation. We can unify the rule base and reduce it in one central management console called SmartConsole. That is our main use case for this product.

I can use one console for access lists, application control, managing day-to-day reporting, granular access control, managing large and segmented environments with multiple domains or customers, and integrating threat management with that console. It has summed up the tasks in one console, which is our specific use case.

We can manage one firewall in one site, one cluster in one of our sites, and another cluster in another site with a single console. This feature allows us to manage large and sophisticated management tasks in one console, which is why it is called Multi-Domain Security Management.

The granular and general access control allows us to centralize our policy management in one console for firewall, application control, URL filtering, IPS, Anti-Bot, Threat Emulation, and Threat Extraction. It is unified in one console, allowing us to unify the rule base to reduce complexity. These features are beneficial, and the system is scalable.

Administrators are operational, so it creates operational efficiency through faster rollouts of change with policy packages, creating faster and easier operational day-to-day activities.

I strongly admire the compliant support feature. It creates detailed logs, audit trails, and customizable reports. It has excellent reporting features including the threat blades, threat prevention blades, and firewalling blades. I can comply with this and provide it for auditors, which makes it an interesting feature.

Performance with logs needs improvement as Check Point Security Management has large-scale environments that need dedicated log servers. If you store logs on the central management server or Check Point SMS, it will create resource-intensive tasks. When the logs are too heavy for the security management server, the CPU spike will be high, causing our management day-to-day activity to lag or become difficult. This needs to be improved. Additionally, the resource demands need improvement. For example, log indexing related to SmartEvent needs strong servers, which should be improved for the future.

I have been deploying Check Point Security Management products for almost three years.

It is stable for our clients.

It is scalable because it can manage different gateways or different firewalls in different sites. It can be multi-domain Security Management server and can manage large or segmented environments with multiple domains or customers.

For management, we did not use another solution. We just used Cisco ASA on that single firewall which can be managed through CLI. We switched from Cisco ASA, but that was not management; it was a firewall.

We considered other vendors such as FortiGate and Palo Alto firewalls. We chose Check Point Security Management server because we selected Check Point for our firewall.

I rate Check Point Security Management nine out of ten because it has good features. I decreased one point due to the performance and resource demanding issues on the log indexing, and SmartEvent needs strong servers, which needs to be considered.

It is deployed on-premises and is not costly. The management server can be expensive, but it excels at what it does.

Check Point Security Management server centralizes our policy management by unifying the firewalling features and threat prevention features to manage it in one console. It creates ease and operational efficiency. We save time and increase our day-to-day operational efficiency by removing management complexity.

If you want to centralize your policy management such as firewalling, application control, URL filtering, and different threat prevention features, and unify your rule base to reduce operational complexity, you need to use Check Point Security Management.

My main use case for Check Point Security Management is as a firewall. I have connected it in my office premises as a firewall. The people who connect to the internet in the internal network have their packet captures go through the firewall itself, ensuring everything is safe and secure.

The best feature Check Point Security Management offers is the GUI. The GUI shows everything in different categories such as mobile phones, connected devices, laptops, and desktops. It displays everything in different dashboards, making it easy to understand what is connected to what.

Having that dashboard helps me in my day-to-day work because it saves time. It shows all the devices that have been connected and how many devices are connected in different ways. Through this, I am able to track how many laptops and mobile phones have occupied my IP addresses.

If I had to pick one thing that could make my experience even better, I would say they need to change the support resolution time. Everything else meets expectations.

I have been using Check Point Security Management for 1.8 years.

Check Point Security Management is stable in my experience with no downtime.

Regarding scalability, I have given the rating of nine out of ten. The support is the only aspect having a glitch; everything else is satisfactory.

I choose a nine out of ten specifically because sometimes the support has a glitch.

I used a different solution before but prefer not to disclose that name. Currently, there are no issues with anything, and everything is functioning properly.

I have seen a hundred percent return on investment with Check Point Security Management.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point Security Management is positive. The products they provide from Check Point are reasonably priced and satisfactory.

Before choosing Check Point Security Management, I did not evaluate other options. I chose only one option, which is Check Point.

My advice to others looking into using Check Point Security Management is to ask all vendors and customers to take the demo for five to 10 times. After ensuring it is supported by their organizations, then proceed forward. I rate Check Point Security Management a nine out of ten.

My main use case for Check Point Security Management is that we use it to manage all our firewalls and also look at the logs that the firewalls generate.

I use the logs in Check Point Security Management both for troubleshooting, seeing traffic from one IP to another IP, and for threat detection, viewing what the IPS and IDS and anti-bot and antivirus generate. It gives a very nice overview where you can see what has happened, when, and what client has generated the logs. It's very easy to get an overview of what's happening in the network.

Check Point Security Management has positively impacted my organization because, after migrating from our previous firewall, a Cisco ASA, we were able to see what traffic was passing through the firewall and from that, build out least access privilege firewall rules. So only what's actually needed by the organization is being let through. The rest is being dropped.

The measurable outcomes with Check Point Security Management show that the troubleshooting is definitely quicker. Now it just takes a few minutes to find out where the error is and resolve it. Before, it was at least an hour or two of troubleshooting to locate the issue.

The best feature Check Point Security Management offers is definitely the log management. I've worked with other firewall vendors and the overview of the logs that you get in Check Point Security Management is superb. You don't get that anywhere else. It's very easy to troubleshoot what traffic is being dropped, what traffic is being passed. It's easy to build firewall rules and everything else. It's miles ahead of anyone else.

Check Point Security Management could definitely improve the lag inside the application. The application has a tendency to get slow when you have a lot of firewall rules inside it. Additionally, it crashes pretty regularly, so they could resolve the stability issues as well.

Regarding the crashes in Check Point Security Management, at least once a day, the application crashes with some random error message. Then you have to close it out and open it up again. The process takes around a minute or two to get back to where you were. It's very frustrating.

I have been using Check Point Security Management for about seven years now.

Check Point Security Management is stable, but the SmartConsole used to administrate the security management is somewhat unstable. The application crashes at least once a day with some random error message. Then you have to close it out and open it up again. The process takes around a minute or two to get back to where you were.

The customer support for Check Point Security Management is great. We have had no issues with them.

I would rate the customer support for Check Point Security Management an eight on a scale of one to 10.

Before Check Point Security Management, I previously used a Cisco ASA.

I switched from Cisco ASA to Check Point Security Management because the Cisco ASA was standalone and had no central management. We went from that to using Check Point Security Management for centralized management of all of our firewalls.

In terms of return on investment, we definitely need fewer employees to manage the amount of firewalls than before. The time to resolve issues is very much better now with Check Point Security Management.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point Security Management is that the licensing is straightforward. We pay on a three-year base. It's very fair pricing.

Before choosing Check Point Security Management, I did not evaluate other options.

I would definitely give Check Point Security Management a 10 out of 10 because the logging oversight that Check Point Security Management gives is superb compared to anything else I've ever tried.

My advice to others looking into using Check Point Security Management is to definitely talk with Check Point Professional Services on how to deploy it since creating management of remote sites over VPN can be challenging. Having a plan on how to actually do that is great beforehand.

Overall rating: 10/10

My main use case for Check Point Security Management is to troubleshoot or add policy, depending on the situation. It could be both, but mainly troubleshooting. We go and take care of the customer's management and resolve issues, create new configurations, and such.

I find very useful the central view offered by Check Point Security Management, as you're able to have all your gateways and policy and different policy packages. The maintenance and addition of new policy is fairly easy. The GUI is also very simple and user-friendly.

The logging feature in Check Point Security Management is effective because the view is one single view and you can have multiple log servers to retrieve the logs from.

The needed improvements in Check Point Security Management depend very much on the customer's infrastructure. For example, an appliance has an easier time than someone with VMs. With VMs, there can be multiple issues related to performance.

I have been working in my current field for around two years.

Since I mainly work on other customers, Check Point Security Management does not much affect my scenario positively, so I cannot provide specific information about deployment issues.

Check Point Security Management has experienced some reliability issues, but it depends on VM, appliance, and any other implementation.

The scalability of Check Point Security Management for a VM depends because you can only enlarge the disk size once and then you probably have to remake it. Also, when you upgrade multiple times, you leave many files that are useless. They are dated, so it's always better to create a new machine every few versions, for example, three or four major versions.

I reach out for help multiple times with Check Point Security Management because many issues are related to the hotfix and known issues or new issues, which we have to work with R&D. The customer support quality varies significantly depending on who you get, what you get, and what the issue is.

I would rate the customer support of Check Point Security Management around a six because recently there's been a decrease in quality.

I am not sure if I previously used a different solution before Check Point Security Management.

I am not aware of the specifics regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point Security Management, but as far as I know, licensing is quite expensive.

My company is not a customer for Check Point Security Management specifically, but we are a partner.

I am not sure if I have seen a return on investment with Check Point Security Management.

I am not aware of the specifics regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point Security Management, but as far as I know, licensing is quite expensive.

I evaluated other options before choosing Check Point Security Management, specifically the Panorama equivalent from Palo Alto Networks.

The challenging part I have experienced with Check Point Security Management has been related to the central licensing. We had some issues where the license got duplicated and it's been a year going around and trying to clean it, but it also made me able to learn multiple things, which included CME and the VSec licensing.

If you have VSec licensing and you add a license that's central, you're going to be able to see it inside the CPMELG file as a VSec common.

I would advise others looking into using Check Point Security Management to put their hands on it. It's easier to learn that way. It's really something you can study, but you're going to be able to know it better when you work on the management itself. At first, people are going to make policy, which is fine. It's the beginning of the CCSA certification. That's the first step.

I was offered a gift card or incentive for this review.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Check Point Security Management a 7.

My main use case for Check Point Security Management is to manage about 500 Check Point firewalls, and we manage all this equipment with this solution.

In my day-to-day work, I manage typical tasks with Check Point Security Management such as policy updates, monitoring, and troubleshooting, and it's easy to manage all the firewalls in this big environment with this solution.

I do not have anything else to add about my main use case or how I use Check Point Security Management.

In my opinion, the best feature Check Point Security Management offers is the ability to upgrade firewalls directly from the management console of the security management, which stands out to me.

Being able to upgrade firewalls directly from the management console makes a big difference for me because it reduces errors, and we do a lot of things automatically, which improves the upgrade process.

Check Point Security Management has positively impacted my organization by saving a lot of time because we have a lot of firewalls, and it provides a console where I can see directly all the managed firewalls, allowing us to manage all of our firewalls from just one point.

I have used Check Point Security Management for several years and have seen its evolution, and I believe they can improve the management by allowing better API functionality because the API now is a little complicated, making it difficult to do automation.

The improvements I would like to see in the API specifically relate to ease of use because the REST API is not easy to use.

I have been using Check Point Security Management for more than 13 years.

Check Point Security Management is really stable, and I have not experienced any downtime or issues with reliability except for when we do upgrades, but after the upgrade, the platform is very stable.

I have reached out to customer support for Check Point Security Management many times, and they answer quickly, with the level of support depending on the difficulty of the problem.

Before using Check Point Security Management, I used a Cisco solution, and we switched to Check Point because Cisco management was not user-friendly, had a lot of bugs, and was very difficult to use.

I can't respond to how much time I've saved or how many incidents have been reduced since I started using Check Point Security Management because I'm pretty sure we saved a lot of time due to the central point of this tool, but I can't share examples.

I have not seen a return on investment in terms of time saved, fewer employees needed, or other benefits since I cannot share any relevant metrics.

We use Fortinet and Cisco as other tech products.

My advice to others looking into using Check Point Security Management is that if you're looking for an easy tool to manage your firewall, you have to use this tool.

I do not have any additional thoughts about Check Point Security Management before we wrap up.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Check Point Security Management a ten.

My main use case for Check Point Security Management is to unify firewall and threat prevention policies across multiple international sites, so I use SmartConsole to streamline rule updates and monitor security events in real-time.

The best features Check Point Security Management offers me are unified management console, automated policy management, and real-time monitoring and reporting.

Check Point Security Management has positively impacted my organization by providing centralized control, allowing us to manage all security policies and gateways from a single console, reducing complexity and saving time, and by enabling faster policy updates, which allowed quicker roll-out of rule changes across multiple sites, improving agility and reducing configuration errors.

I see areas of improvement for Check Point Security Management such as GUI stability and performance, and simplified firmware upgrades.

I and my colleagues occasionally report glitches or missing data views with the GUI stability and performance issues, and sometimes SmartConsole crashes.

The main things regarding needed improvements are GUI stability and performance, and there is no need to add more.

I have been using Check Point Security Management for five to six years.

Check Point Security Management is stable, although sometimes it is not.

Check Point Security Management is scalable.

The customer support for Check Point Security Management is good.

I did not previously use a different solution before Check Point Security Management.

I have seen a strong ROI from using Check Point Security Management through unified policy management, reduced misconfigurations, and faster incident response.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Check Point Security Management.

My advice for others looking into using Check Point Security Management is that if you manage complex or multi-site networks, it is a powerful tool for centralizing control and improving security consistency.

I don't have specific metrics or examples of time saved, fewer errors, or other measurable benefits.

I don't have information regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing.

My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

I was offered a gift card for this review.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Check Point Security Management an eight.

This is the Wi-Fi documentation. I work with the service, and we are partners with Check Point. One of our clients, Parliament, required an upgrade from physical to virtual implementation. This was my first implementation. We have another client, and the plan is to do something with them this year, although I'm not sure when. I've been involved in some other things, however, this was my first implementation.

It's a reliable solution for security without mentioning its importance. We can't work without Check Point since it provides the real visibility needed to manage the environment. You can depend on it, as it assures the environment is well-secured. It's doing great work, and we can't work without SQL. We don't work with any other solution.

One case I saw was with the logs, which gave me the transfer and the vibration. There's a lot of logs, and I'm unsure about their validity, however, they take up a lot of space. We had to provision the virtual machine twice. Another reason is that the database was already large thanks to the numerous logs. I'm not sure how they can be managed comprehensively.

I have done my first implementation of the solution.

Ever since I implemented it, we have not had any complaints from the client side. That is a good sign regarding stability.

Check support was involved during the implementation. We had support during the migration process. The issue was the size of the partition for logs. After the support, we realized we needed to resize. The challenge was with drivers due to the size, and we had not provisioned the partition to the right size. This was resolved with support.

We had to determine the specifications required for the security of the virtual machine, such as memory, storage, and network setup. The provisioning of the VM depended on the available resources since the box itself had a lot of memory. Specifications are crucial for the setup, and we needed enough storage. The migration was time-consuming but manageable.

With Check Point, I can compare it with Fortinet. Fortinet is a bit lower, while Check Point is on a higher level in terms of visibility and reliability. I've seen recommendations for Check Point over other products.

I would definitely recommend Check Point, especially since our client was already using it. We had considered other options, but Check Point was preferable. The implementation supports an environment with more than one hundred users.

Overall, I would rate this product a ten out of ten.

We work with multiple security tools, including network security and information security solutions. Our primary use case includes using Check Point and other tools like CyberArk for privilege access management, Cisco, and WebSight CloudSec.

The product helps in securing our complete organization. We have not received any alerts that were suspicious, which assures us that it's working as expected.

It's already helped secure our organization effectively. That said, the integration of all the firewalls should be centralized, which would make management easier.

We are not sure if there is a centralized security console available. It would be beneficial if all firewalls could be integrated under one management console.

We have been using the firewall for more than ten years.

We are confident in the security solution as we have not faced any alerts that were suspicious.

We have partner support that helps us mitigate vulnerabilities reported by our infrastructure team. Most of the time, we get good support.

The first deployment takes two to three days. After setup, maintenance and updates are straightforward.

Since we are using it extensively, we get significant discounts during procurement. The tool is cost-effective.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The Security Management server provides centralized management to manage all the security gateways.

Many organizations will have more than one firewall. This may be in the same location or in a different location. Users can manage all the firewalls from a single location.

It provides centralized logging for all incoming and outgoing traffic.

The solution centralizes licensing and auto-licensing with smart updating.

In organizations where there are many firewalls, one firewall license may expire. We can easily update licenses from the smart console from the same location or from different locations.

It also provides centralized logging that helps during troubleshooting - which provides detailed logging of access rules, NAT rules, application filters, VPNs, etc.

The centralized logs and management are helpful. All of the logs are stored in an external server or within the Management Server. All of the logs are very easy to understand and provide detailed information about the instance.

Through the Management Server we can easily enable all the features and easily disable them as well.

Check Point offers PS services in India. As per personal experience and based on many organizations, Check Point needs to improve PS services.

For the past one and a half years, I have been using a Check Point Firewall and Check Point Management Server.

The stability is the best.

I am satisfied with the scalability.

So far, there is no point reach out to technical support.

No, we have not selected any other solution.

As a Check Point implementation engineer, I found the setup process easy.

The vendor expertise is very good.

The licensing price is a bit expensive. However, it provides very good security at the perimeter level.

No, we have not evaluated other options.

They just need to improve PS service in India.