What is our primary use case?
Our major use cases for Unified Vulnerability Management include user identity, endpoint management, security management for endpoints, authentication, and authorization. We also use it to filter internet traffic from end users.
What is most valuable?
Based on my experience, the visibility and zero trust that Unified Vulnerability Management provides brings the biggest benefit.
The scanning in Unified Vulnerability Management helps with vulnerability management by scanning applications and users' internet-bound traffic as well as data center traffic. It flags anomalies and measures against known vulnerabilities, known CVEs, and vulnerabilities, making it a process of filtering, scanning, and reporting of anomalies.
We are using the automated scanning feature in Unified Vulnerability Management.
What needs improvement?
Regarding the ability of Unified Vulnerability Management to generate customizable compliance reports, it is adequate, but sometimes you still need to be able to filter whatever the report generates to ensure accuracy and have a baseline on what the report provides. You should be able to filter and also take action on critical and non-critical reports. You get a lot of reports, but filtering them is essential.
The negative side of Unified Vulnerability Management is that you need a skill set that is not readily available. You require a lot of training and personnel that understand the technology, so getting the skill set is a major issue for managing the technology.
For how long have I used the solution?
The scanning in Unified Vulnerability Management helps with vulnerability management by scanning applications and users' internet-bound traffic as well as data center traffic. It flags anomalies and measures against known vulnerabilities, known CVEs, and vulnerabilities, making it a process of filtering, scanning, and reporting of anomalies.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Unified Vulnerability Management is generally stable, although we experienced latency issues once, but it has been fixed, and so far, it has been good.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Unified Vulnerability Management is scalable.
How are customer service and support?
The technical support from Unified Vulnerability Management is adequate, but not as robust as Cisco; we still experience delays.
Regarding improvements to support, the response time could be better, but not the quality of support.
I would rate the support from Unified Vulnerability Management at six out of ten points.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Comparing Unified Vulnerability Management with Cisco, there are crucial differences. For Cisco, you have more skilled engineers available to manage Cisco enterprise and technologies, but for Unified Vulnerability Management, you require training and a specific skill set. Support from Cisco is better from my experience.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment process of Unified Vulnerability Management is straightforward because it primarily involves cloud support or deployment with few changes to the infrastructure.
What about the implementation team?
We used an integrator for the deployment of Unified Vulnerability Management, so it is a mix of mostly integrator and consultant for quality assurance, along with in-house contributions.
What was our ROI?
I see a very high return on investment with Unified Vulnerability Management.
The ROI with Unified Vulnerability Management is approximately 60 percent so far, given one year in the deployment. We have used Unified Vulnerability Management for less than one year, so I would say 60 percent so far.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Regarding pricing for Unified Vulnerability Management, it is expensive; pricing is another issue.
I would rate the price of Unified Vulnerability Management at nine out of ten points.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
What other advice do I have?
For remediation, we do it manually, which is handled by another team. We have not used the remediation workflow tools in Unified Vulnerability Management.
The integration capabilities of Unified Vulnerability Management impact our overall IT security strategy positively. It integrates seamlessly with other systems and applications using APIs, and we do not have issues with integration, even with tools to generate tickets and reporting.
Risk-based prioritization is important for our resource allocation. When you refer to critical and non-critical vulnerabilities, we know what to focus on and what to tackle at any point in time.
With risk-based prioritization in Unified Vulnerability Management, it makes attention-driven decisions possible. We eliminate critical vulnerabilities as soon as possible using an agile process. Other vulnerabilities are worked on based on availability, so critical ones come first, then low and medium risks follow. It is really important.
I would rate this review at seven out of ten points.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Other
