Has blocked web-based threats and reduced attack success using real-time detection and intelligence
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for Check Point CloudGuard WAF is protecting the public-facing web applications in my company because I need to show different webs to different clients, and I need to protect these web apps.
In addition to protecting public-facing web apps and APIs, I also use Check Point CloudGuard WAF for different purposes, such as providing protection to non-production environments, ensuring that vulnerabilities are caught early during deployment and testing, which helps identify misconfiguration or insecure code before it reaches production.
How has it helped my organization?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted my organization by significantly improving both security and operational efficiency, with a noticeable reduction in web-based threats, especially automated attacks and vulnerability exploits, thanks to its real-time prevention and reputation filter that has streamlined my workflow through automatic policy updates and integration smoothly with my CI/CD pipelines, allowing my DevOps teams to deploy security without delays.
AI-based threat detection and contextual machine learning to block known and zero-day attacks, according to Check Point, have led to a notable decrease in successful web-based attacks.
What is most valuable?
The best features that Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers in my experience include advanced threat detection with blocking OWASP Top 10 threats such as SQL injection, XSS, and CSRF with high accuracy, along with granular access controls such as geo-blocking and IP reputation filter.
The reputation filter has helped me significantly. For example, I was once notified of a spike in traffic targeting one of my login portals, which at first glance looked like normal user activity, but the reputation filter flagged the source IPs as part of a known botnet associated with credential stuffing attacks, leading to those IPs being blocked before they could even reach the authentication layer.
What needs improvement?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution, but there are a few areas where it could be improved, particularly the user interface for managing custom rules and exceptions, which could be more intuitive and streamlined to reduce the learning curve for new users, especially when deploying for the first time.
I think the documentation could be better. People need more intuitive documentation and easier steps for the first deployment.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Check Point CloudGuard WAF for around three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is stable in my experience with no downtime or reliability issues.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is very scalable and has handled growth or increased traffic well.
How are customer service and support?
The customer support for Check Point CloudGuard WAF is great. I have had great response time, and it has been very helpful for me.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I did not previously use a different solution.
How was the initial setup?
The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point CloudGuard WAF is straightforward, with the service being available as a fully managed service, and the pricing depending on traffic volume, number of protected applications, and cloud provider. I do not have a problem with this area.
What was our ROI?
I have seen a return on investment, having more time in the department, which is the relevant metric of time saved.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Check Point CloudGuard WAF is straightforward, with the service being available as a fully managed service, and the pricing depending on traffic volume, number of protected applications, and cloud provider. I do not have a problem with this area.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing Check Point CloudGuard WAF, I compared it with Azure WAF, but I had to select Check Point CloudGuard WAF.
I compare Check Point CloudGuard WAF with Azure WAF, noting that I need to centralize the security products, preferring different tools in Check Point Infinity Portal since they are from the same company.
What other advice do I have?
If you are considering using Check Point CloudGuard WAF, my top advice is to take full advantage of its automatic learning and threat intelligence features right from the start. Begin with the detect learning mode to observe traffic patterns and fine-tune policies before switching to full prevention, which helps reduce false positives and ensure a smoother deployment.
I do not utilize Check Point CloudGuard WAF alongside any other Check Point products.
Check Point CloudGuard WAF helps me block specific web-based attacks such as SQL injections or cross-site scripting with threat prevention.
Check Point CloudGuard WAF has helped me reduce my false positive rate to approximately fourteen percent, thanks to its adaptive threat prevention and machine learning capabilities.
The breach reduction capabilities of Check Point CloudGuard WAF are impressive, especially in how it proactively blocks zero-day threats and bot-driven attacks before they reach critical systems. For example, it stopped a credential stuffing attempt on my login portal using the reputation filter and input validation. I would rate this review a nine.
AI-powered WAF that reduces manual tuning BUT comes at a premium
What do you like best about the product?
I evaluated Check Point CloudGuard WAF as part of a proposal to protect a cloud-hosted web and API stack. The deployment process was remarkably fast — it took only a few minutes to get up and running — and the integration with our existing CI/CD pipeline was smooth and straightforward. It provided comprehensive visibility into API traffic and strong protection against common web threats without requiring extensive manual tuning.
What do you dislike about the product?
The solution is slightly more expensive compared to some of its competitors, such as Cloudflare WAF and Imperva WAF. However, the additional cost is partly justified by its advanced AI-driven threat detection, API discovery capabilities, and the overall reliability of Check Point’s cloud-native infrastructure.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
For us, the biggest benefit has been the ease of deployment and ongoing management — it integrates seamlessly with CI/CD workflows, scales automatically with cloud workloads, and provides clear visibility into traffic patterns and attack trends. Overall, it has simplified application security operations and improved confidence in protecting our cloud environment.
Great cloud protection that’s easy to set up and really effective
What do you like best about the product?
I really like how easy it is to deploy and how effectively it protects applications without adding latency. It integrates smoothly with cloud environments and provides great visibility into threats..
What do you dislike about the product?
Sometimes the configuration can feel a bit complex at first, and the interface could be more intuitive for fine-tuning policies.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
It helps protect our cloud applications from common web attacks like SQL injection and XSS, ensuring compliance and reducing security risks. It also saves time by automating threat detection and response
Exceptional Threat Protection and Seamless Cloud Integration
What do you like best about the product?
Users consistently praise its ability to identify and block sophisticated threats targeting web applications and APIs using machine learning and behavioral analysis. CloudGuard WAF secures APIs with deep inspection and policy enforcement, which is crucial for modern cloud-native applications. CloudGuard WAF is built for cloud/DevOps environments: quick deployment, infrastructure as code, SaaS-style or managed mode.Easy to implement
What do you dislike about the product?
No dislike as of now. we liked the solution.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Stronger Application Security Reduces the risk of data breaches and service disruptions by proactively blocking threats.Simplified Management Centralized dashboard and automated policy updates make it easy to monitor and respond to threats.Because it supports cloud native and SaaS modes, you can deploy quickly and scale as your web infrastructure grows or shifts. That supports agile/DevOps workflows.Since the WAF is more intelligent (fewer false blocks) and supports modern web architectures (APIs, microservices), legitimate users have fewer disruptions and the business can deliver services reliably.
Comprehensive Protection and Easy Setup with Excellent Support
What do you like best about the product?
What I like best about Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its comprehensive, proactive protection for web applications against modern threats.Another standout feature is its integration with Check Point Threat Cloud, which provides continuous updates on emerging threats, enabling proactive defense and reducing the window of vulnerability.Offers detailed reports and dashboards for compliance and operational insights.Easy to implement. Nice customer support.
What do you dislike about the product?
Initial Learning Curve is the only challenge. Product is so great.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Traditional WAFs often require manual tuning to avoid blocking legitimate traffic. CloudGuard’s AI-driven detection minimizes false positives, reducing the need for constant rule adjustment.With advanced analytics and continuous monitoring, it enables proactive threat detection and response, giving security teams better visibility into application-layer attacks.The capability to deploy quickly means you can secure new applications faster, keep pace with DevOps, and not delay releases for security gating.
Adaptive Protection and Unified Console Make CloudGuard Stand Out
What do you like best about the product?
Unlike traditional WAFs that focus mainly on OWASP Top 10, CloudGuard uses Check Point’s ThreatCloud intelligence to detect. CloudGuard WAF uses machine learning and behavioral analysis to adaptively tune protection, reducing false positives.You can manage the WAF alongside your cloud network security, API protection, and runtime posture through a single CloudGuard console. Support is as always so great.
What do you dislike about the product?
Documentation and self-help resources are seen as lacking in some areas — users say they sometimes need more detailed examples or stronger guidance
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
CloudGuard does automated discovery of API endpoints, applies contextual AI to traffic, and doesn’t rely purely on static signatures. CloudGuard uses ML / behavioural analysis to detect anomalous traffic or patterns even if no signature exists. CloudGuard supports deployment across cloud providers, hybrid models, and integrates with cloud-native services. CloudGuard provides centralised console, logging, visibility across cloud apps, and integrates with threat-intel.
Check Point CloudGuard WAF
What do you like best about the product?
Checkpoint CloudGuard WAF is a great solution. It uses contextual AI/ML based threat prevention to stop both known threats and zero-day attacks without need for constant signature updates. From a deployment and operation viewpoint, CloudGuard WAF shines, it is cloud-native, Supports infrastructure as a code/API-based setup. Customer support is so great. We have achieved all our use cases.
What do you dislike about the product?
No dislike as of now. We liked that product.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
CloudGuard WAF addresses the challenges posted by traditional WAFs that rely heavily on static signatures, manual rule tuning and reactive defences. It also improves detection accuracy while dramatically reducing false positives, so your security operation teams spend much time investigating benign traffic and more time responding to real threats. Additional features like built in bot detection, DDos mitigation, and file upload scanning further close off common attack vectors.
Checkpoint Cloudguard WAF
What do you like best about the product?
Checkpoint CloudGuard WAF is appreciated for its intelligent,prevention first approach to securing web application and API's. It offers comprehensive suite of protection, including bot mitigation, DDoS defence, file reputation check and coverage for thousands of known vulnerabilities.Beyond its technical strengths, Checkpoint CoudGuard WAF Excels in delivering a seamless user experience. customer support is so great.
What do you dislike about the product?
Some users have also noted that documentation can be more user-friendly. Other than this solution is so greta.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
One of the biggest problems it solves is the detection and prevention of zero-day attacks and OWASP top 10 vulnerabilities with relying on signature update. A common pain point with traditional WAFs that generate excessive false positive. CloudGuard's cloud-native design and support for infrastructure-as-code streamline deployment and integration into CI/CD pipelines.
Checkpoint CloudGuard WAF
What do you like best about the product?
What I like most about Checkpoint cloud guard WAF is it combine, AI-Driven protection with simplicity of deployment and low operational burden. The solution is cloud native, scalable, globally distributed and designed for rapid deployment so organization can protect their web assets quickly. Checkpoint Cloud Guard WAF uses contextual AI to defend web apps and APIs from known and zero-day threats, with minimal false positive and no manual tunning. Customer support is very active.
What do you dislike about the product?
There is no dislike as of now. Product is doing great.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
CloudGuard's machine learning engines detect behavioral anomalies and uses both supervised and unsupervised learning to find threats without waiting for signature updates. Reduced noise and fewer false alarm - less time wasted investigating false positive. Better compliance- enhanced visibility and reporting help show where protections are in place. Deployment is fast and scalable, integrating with cloud-native environments, means protection can go live quickly.
Robust threat protection improves security and operational efficiency
What is our primary use case?
Our main use case for Check Point CloudGuard WAF is to protect web applications and APIs from common threats such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and bot attacks.
A specific example of how we've used Check Point CloudGuard WAF to protect against SQL injection attempts is that we had a public-facing customer portal hosted on AWS, where CloudGuard WAF detected and logged multiple SQL injection attempts targeting the login page and flagged the attacks in real time. We were able to review detailed logs showing the malicious payload, which ensured the application stayed fully available without any downtime and prevented the exposure of sensitive data, giving our security team confidence that the WAF rules were working efficiently against the OWASP Top 10 threats.
How has it helped my organization?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted our organization in security and operational efficiency. Our critical web apps and APIs are now continuously protected against the OWASP Top 10 threats, and we have seen fewer phishing exploit attempts after deploying, with a 30-40% drop in malicious traffic and a 15-20% reduction in manual intervention for our SOC team due to reduced false positives and automated protection.
By blocking attacks automatically at the WAF layer, we have reduced the incidents escalated to our SOC team by around 30-35%, and the application team no longer needs to push urgent code changes to mitigate vulnerabilities. The WAF policies buy them time, saving several hours per incident, and with fewer false positives and reduced noise, we have avoided the need to hire additional headcount for web app monitoring.
What is most valuable?
Some of the standout features of Check Point CloudGuard WAF that help with our main use case are contextual machine learning-based WAF, including the OWASP Top 10 API-based protection and discovery, anti-bot protection, intrusion prevention and CVE coverage, file security, DDoS and rate limiting.
The contextual machine learning-based protection of Check Point CloudGuard WAF works effectively for most teams because it goes beyond the static signature and regex-based detection that traditional WAFs rely on. Compared to older WAFs, we have noticed clear differences, such as smarter detection of novel attacks thanks to the ML engine and lower false positives, meaning the legitimate traffic isn't blocked as often, and we experience faster onboarding for new apps, allowing us to spend less time tuning the policies.
What needs improvement?
Areas where Check Point CloudGuard WAF can improve include simple policy tuning, as the protection seems strong, though initial rule tuning can be complex. More guided workflows or templates would help speed up deployment, along with deeper integration with the DevOps pipeline, and while it handles API well, more dedicated API security would add value.
In addition, it could be improved with better integration with the DevOps pipeline, more granular reporting, as the dashboards provide good high-level visibility, but sometimes digging into specific attack patterns or trends requires manual effort, and simple tuning of the ML models would be beneficial.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Check Point CloudGuard WAF for around a year.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before adopting Check Point CloudGuard WAF, we were using the AWS native WAF for some workloads and Imperva WAF in certain environments, which provided baseline protection but were found too limited in advanced threat protection.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing and licensing seem fair but not the simplest, as the licensing is flexible and subscription-based. While it can feel complex to estimate the upfront cost depending on traffic volume and features enabled, the initial setup cost is straightforward with minimal infrastructure costs, though fine-tuning and integrating took extra time, which adds to the indirect setup cost in terms of experienced resources.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I did not evaluate other options before choosing Check Point CloudGuard WAF.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate Check Point CloudGuard WAF an 8 out of 10.
I chose the 8 because Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides robust protection, great cloud integration, and effective ML-based threat detection, which has improved our AppSec posture, but it isn't a 9 or 10 yet because the policy tuning can be complex, advanced API protection feels limited, and the learning curve is somewhat steep for new administrators.
My advice for those looking into using Check Point CloudGuard WAF is to plan your deployment strategy early, especially whether to run it in a single cloud or across different environments, as that impacts the setup.
My company has a business relationship with Check Point, as we are a partner.
I was not offered a gift card or incentive for this review.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
