Check Point CloudGuard is a comprehensive cloud security platform used to prevent threats and prioritize risks in the cloud across applications, network, and workloads.
N/A
Rapid7 InsightVM
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
InsightVM is presented as the next evolution of Nexpose, by Rapid7. This Insight cloud-based solution features everything included in Nexpose, such as Adaptive Security and the proprietary Real Risk score, and extends visibility into cloud and containerized infrastructure. InsightVM also offers advanced remediation, tracking, and reporting capabilities not included in Nexpose.
We have performed all research and evaluation for all competitive players as well we did POC for every product. Based on our comparison chart, we found Check Point Cloud Guard Native Security Platform much better and works extremally well compared to all other peers. It has a …
First and foremost reason of our client selecting CheckPoint CloudGuard Posture Management / Dome9 was because they already had CheckPoint Firewalls which are in active use e.g. R75.40 and R82.x products. Customization Vs these other Vendors is another great asset Reporting is …
Dome9 is a comprehensive security and compliance orchestration platform that provides end-to-end security life cycle management across accounts, regions, and clouds. Using Dome9 we can monitor our security baselines are applied to all our cloud accounts, also we can prevent …
We are also piloting Trend Micro Cloud App Security, but we don't have enough data to make a fair comparison, but from what I've seen, Check Point offers a much more comprehensive platform.
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.
I think Tenable is very comparable and they are both leaders in this space. I evaluated both of them side-by-side and ultimately decided to go with Rapid7. Tenable did have a slight edge on the amount of information I was getting from the machines, but I landed on R7 because I …
Rapid7 InsightVM is more cost effective than the other solution on the market. It is easy to deploy and the user interface is easy to use and intuative. We select Rapid7 InsightVM mainly because it integrates well with ServiceNow compared to the other solution that were …
Rapid7 InsightVM is a more professional tool than NESSUS because historically, it was based on metasploit which is a powerful pentesting and exploiting tool. InsightVM covers more attacking scenarios and vulnerabilities than competitors and still a leader in this domain.cloud …
Nessus Pro does scans, but does not maintain an inventory from scan to scan. There is no history for a specific device, you have to look inside the results of each scan. Search across inventory is non-existent. There are no dashboards for data analysis. This is no tracking …
Tenable has a more refined look for the reporting that it provides as a result of scanning events, but Nexpose seems to have a better ability to help quantify risk and help prioritize the work needed to get the quickest security result for the team and the company. The Nessus …
Scenarios most suited - 1) All the Cyber Security focused development environments 2) Definitely a must for Financial Clients since it deals with live money transactions - Hence it is imperative to keep the Network and tech asset environment secure, and compliant to standards 3) IAM is another area where it plays an IMP part - For eg one of our healthcare clients where they wanted to restrict access 4) Dashboards are also great, we can share the results to GISO/CISO level folks - Custom dashboard feature
I think Rapid7 InsightVM is well suited for large enterprise customers with a lot of assets. It integrates well with a number of different ITSM solutions which I think is very good. There are not many CIS benchmarking tools on the market and Rapid7 InsightVM does a very good job at benchmarking. I think where Rapid7 InsightVM falls down a little is on false positive vulnerabilities. Sometime you there a few positive results on vulnerabily discovery. Tuning the settings for scan engines can sometimes be trick as well.
The API is also a great tool for us to automate lots of routine procedures like scan and report of asset(s) BY EMAIL.
Tagging. It helps sort out results and reports for respective assets Owner for remediation without a lengthy report including unnecessary information for that particular team.
SQL Reporting. It provides advanced reporting and export capabilities that you can not find in the stock report template.
Devices found and scanned are never removed. Removal must be done manually with no option for automation.
The database can be fragile. Ours quietly corrupted and progressively degraded until we had to restore and lose 6 months of data. Still didn't fix it and had to be rebuilt again losing all data.
Workflow for delegating remediation is supposed to be helpful, but can also become cumbersome.
Scheduling can become a nightmare if not monitored closely. We found jobs had failed to run because the server had gone offline. When the server came online, it did not try to run missed jobs. Running missed jobs all at once can overload the server, but searching for and launching a large number of missed jobs manually is a pain.
While I think it is a great tool and platform, I believe it (like all tools and solutions) is always evolving and the needs for clients are changing as the industry evolves and threats are upgraded. Cost is good, and support is helpful. Some things could be more granular and others could be easier to understand
I gave it a seven due to the functionality and general ease of use after the initial setup headaches, but compared to Qualys, Rapid7 Nexpose falls short on features and ease of use. Their support drags this rating down a point as well. I have gone weeks with no update on semi-critical issues and typically have to make call after call to get a semi-coherent response.
We have performed all research and evaluation for all competitive players as well we did POC for every product. Based on our comparison chart, we found Check Point Cloud Guard Native Security Platform much better and works extremally well compared to all other peers. It has a robust architecture and has really good features.
I think Tenable is very comparable and they are both leaders in this space. I evaluated both of them side-by-side and ultimately decided to go with Rapid7. Tenable did have a slight edge on the amount of information I was getting from the machines, but I landed on R7 because I found the features of the InsightVM tool to be more useful. They both get the job done, but I found InsightVM a better experience to use on a day-to-day basis and had better quality of life features that I was looking for.
It certainly has a more positive impact than negative impact while performing the scans. Nexpose can find report vulnerabilities that our other scanner fails to identify during the scan because of its defined scan templates.
Also, even if the scan is not being performed due to some issues like reachability, whitelisting, etc. it will try to give scan results unlike QualysGuard which just marks the asset as unreachable.
