FireMon is a real-time security policy management solution built for today’s complex multi-vendor, enterprise environments. Supporting the latest firewall and policy enforcement technologies spanning on-premises networks to the cloud, FireMon delivers visibility and control across the entire IT landscape to automate policy changes, meet compliance standards, to minimize policy-related risk. Since creating their policy management solution in 2004, FireMon states they've helped…
N/A
Rapid7 InsightVM
Score 8.5 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.
$19
per GB
Pricing
FireMon
Rapid7 InsightVM
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Log Management
$19
per GB
Vulnerability Management
$22
per asset
insightIDR
$52
per asset
Application Security
$2,000
per app
insignConnect
Contact sales team
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
FireMon
Rapid7 InsightVM
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
FireMon
Rapid7 InsightVM
Considered Both Products
FireMon
Verified User
Administrator
Chose FireMon
For our use case, only FireMon met our needs with the systems we use.
FireMon is best used in a large environment (for example, I have >100 firewalls in my environment). It's best used when trying to improve security posture and showing changes in firewall security over time. It might not be the best choice for smaller environments or those that aren't concerned about security management.
InsightVM is great for finding all devices on your network and where the misconfigurations exist. We all have to patch our systems and applications, but it can be difficult to keep track of which systems are up to date. This tool is very helpful in filling in this gap and helping you organize that information. It is easy to get a big picture view of how your organization is doing from a vulnerability perspective, and it is equally as easy to drill down and get specific details that you need. Prioritization is crucial when it comes to this space, because you can never address every vulnerability, so you need to make sure the highest priority items are being remediated. R7's tool excels in this area and highlights items you weren't even aware of.
From my experience of using this tool, sometimes it gives more false positives. A few times I had performed the scan on the same IP address using QualysGuard and Nexpose, but after comparing the scan results I had found that QualysGuard had provided more accurate vulnerability information.
The shell is locked out and we can't run any general centos commands. The implementation and maintainence of the arch is very complex. Even with the right identifiers on log messages the log collection keeps failing. The warning messages on the device are ambiguous. The log messages on firemon are a bit confusing and don't show the exact issue.
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
FireMon has been relatively stable overall. However, there have been a handful of times where we had issues with the console. For example, we couldn't update which devices to include in a security assessment. The initial suggestion from support was to just reboot it. It seems like there weren't many other options available such as to restart services before going to the extreme of a complete reboot.
I'm not sure we have the largest implementation of FireMon out there but we do have a few 1000 devices being probed by FireMon. Overall, the system's performance has been rock solid. The console refreshes quickly and reports are generated within an expected timeframe.
FireMon technical support is awesome! They respond quickly to our requests and they are well trained and very knowledgeable about the tool. Some issues have to be referred to the development team, but technical support largely provides solutions for any issues that we may have.
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.
I has worked with AlgoSec and while they are very similar product, I find the FireMon is easier to understand and get rolling with. While both require some learning, FireMon is by far the easier one. Once you have an understanding of how things are arranged and labeled you can easily import firewalls and begin to work on them to improve them
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 capability is also not available forNesuus and some other products. Rapid7 InsightVM is a way better as a pentesting tool in my opinion
Firemon Is easily scalable and maintainable with any size team. Although it requires some tech debt, it is well worth the time to invest to ensure compliance is visible and reports are accurate. Although our environment is very large we do not fully utilize the scalability of the Firemon product.
After spending 2 years configuring, tuning, troubleshooting, and ultimately having nothing but regrets, we migrated away from the tool and accepted the loss.
Support had a variety of opinions, none of them consistent. No best practices. Lots of secret tricks known by support, none documented or shared until after problems are found.
Consulting services are available to come out and do a health check of your deployment, for a fee.
