Ivanti Security Controls vs. Vulcan Cyber

Agentless patching is the best of all the products I've used. The real-time updates that don't require re-scanning after each step is great.

Incentivized

It's really challenging at times to contend with multiple vulnerabilities on a daily basis, and having a way to make sense of what actually needs to be prioritized and what can be shifted further down the task list is extremely helpful. Because the solution suggests what your next step should be in mitigating a specific vulnerability, it helps us save time and research by enabling us to immediately take action after being informed about an issue.

Incentivized

• Trusted ownership checking is a good way to implement effective basic protection.
• Patching is important today to react quickly to security problems. With Security Controls, it's easier than ever before.
• One console for whole security.

• Identifies vulnerabilities and they are easily understood.
• Easy to identify remedies in an instant.
• Campaign feature is a true time saver
• Our CSM, Nino, is the best I have ever worked with!

Incentivized

• Performance of the console when using agentless machines.
• The console layout is a bit cumbersome - would be better if all functions were accessible from one screen.
• Common deployment examples to assist with deployment types.

Incentivized

• Deduping of assets could be better.
• The weighting of vulnerabilities is hard to describe to non technical executives.
• The Business Groups and Tagging needs improvement. Or at least allow tags to be removed if not needed. Now they are static from the API feed.

Incentivized

Support wasn't used as the cost didn't justify the expense. We have yet to use the support.

Incentivized

Since we have been using Application Control for about 15 years, it is, of course, the best solution for us. We also looked at other products (RES One Workspace), but they didn't convince us. Some features of RES were good and are now part of the User Workspace Manager. The Microsoft solution seems too complicated to us and does not have the advantages of Trusted Ownership Checking.

I wasn't here at the time when the company compared different vulnerability management platforms so I'm not sure on the reasoning and difference between the 2. It could be that the team went through different choices and found Vulcan to be the best fit. It's hard for me to say why Vulcan was specifically chosen

Incentivized

• Reduced amount of operating hours for administration of patching.

Incentivized

• Allows much better prioritizing of which assets are most vulnerable
• Allow a better understanding of what assets are actually under real threat vs. what is assumed to be vulnerable, but the real world fact is the system would be hard to reach internally, so it's not as vulnerable.

Incentivized