<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Thoughts on 2021 Gartner MQ for Endpoints in Endpoint</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Endpoint/Thoughts-on-2021-Gartner-MQ-for-Endpoints/m-p/118223#M4315</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi CheckMates,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First off - let me state that I take Gartner as serious as the next technical guy, but unfortunately we as partners are competing very hard for a piece of our clients security budgets and the C-Levels just love Gartner.&amp;nbsp; And of course the competition is using this in competitive scenarios now as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I find the 2021 findings to be a bit silly where Harmony Endpoint is concerned , with cautions being silly things (IMHO) such as&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;emphasis on automated remediation (how is this a bad thing!?)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;marketing strategy (with harmony rebranding CP has made a massive marketing push, but still is irrelevant IMO)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;limited managed services offerings (Infinity portal facilitates this very well?)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;larger footprint (this one I'll concede, the client is somewhat heavy on older or low-spec machines)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;Fortunately the cautions above is balanced out by the excellent technical performance on the MITRE Evaluation - I'm just interested in Check Point's response to this.&amp;nbsp; I recall a couple of years Check Point had a very strong response to a Gartner MQ for UTM gateways, whereafter Gartner subsequently updated their MQ putting Check Point in the top right quadrant (going from memory here.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For reference - the Gartner MW for Endpoint can be found here:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-2435Z2CX&amp;amp;ct=200903&amp;amp;st=sb" target="_self"&gt;https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-2435Z2CX&amp;amp;ct=200903&amp;amp;st=sb&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;Ruan&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 10:02:01 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ruan_Kotze</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-05-12T10:02:01Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Thoughts on 2021 Gartner MQ for Endpoints</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Endpoint/Thoughts-on-2021-Gartner-MQ-for-Endpoints/m-p/118223#M4315</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi CheckMates,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First off - let me state that I take Gartner as serious as the next technical guy, but unfortunately we as partners are competing very hard for a piece of our clients security budgets and the C-Levels just love Gartner.&amp;nbsp; And of course the competition is using this in competitive scenarios now as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I find the 2021 findings to be a bit silly where Harmony Endpoint is concerned , with cautions being silly things (IMHO) such as&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;emphasis on automated remediation (how is this a bad thing!?)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;marketing strategy (with harmony rebranding CP has made a massive marketing push, but still is irrelevant IMO)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;limited managed services offerings (Infinity portal facilitates this very well?)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;larger footprint (this one I'll concede, the client is somewhat heavy on older or low-spec machines)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;Fortunately the cautions above is balanced out by the excellent technical performance on the MITRE Evaluation - I'm just interested in Check Point's response to this.&amp;nbsp; I recall a couple of years Check Point had a very strong response to a Gartner MQ for UTM gateways, whereafter Gartner subsequently updated their MQ putting Check Point in the top right quadrant (going from memory here.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For reference - the Gartner MW for Endpoint can be found here:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-2435Z2CX&amp;amp;ct=200903&amp;amp;st=sb" target="_self"&gt;https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-2435Z2CX&amp;amp;ct=200903&amp;amp;st=sb&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;Ruan&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 10:02:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Endpoint/Thoughts-on-2021-Gartner-MQ-for-Endpoints/m-p/118223#M4315</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ruan_Kotze</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-05-12T10:02:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Thoughts on 2021 Gartner MQ for Endpoints</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Endpoint/Thoughts-on-2021-Gartner-MQ-for-Endpoints/m-p/118429#M4328</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Not sure what I can say about this publicly, but your local Check Point office should be able to provide some color around this topic.&lt;BR /&gt;That said, you've definitely seen the excellent results in the recent MITRE evaluation:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://attackevals.mitre-engenuity.org/enterprise/participants/checkpoint/results.html?adversary=carbanak_fin7" target="_blank"&gt;https://attackevals.mitre-engenuity.org/enterprise/participants/checkpoint/results.html?adversary=carbanak_fin7&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 May 2021 22:21:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Endpoint/Thoughts-on-2021-Gartner-MQ-for-Endpoints/m-p/118429#M4328</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-05-14T22:21:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

