Simplified Vulnerability Management
August 09, 2024
Simplified Vulnerability Management

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with Cisco Vulnerability Management
We utilize CVM to manage vulnerabilities and to mitigate those vulnerabilities found in a timely coordinated fashion. The product gives us a big picture of the threats found ranging from user end devices to server level systems. Having this information we are able then to mend these security gaps and patch systems to better protect our company as a whole.
Pros
- Vulnerability tracking
- Risk Meter reporting to pinpoint specific systems or vulnerabilities
- Provides vulnerability scores to see what is high / medium / low urgency
Cons
- Faster system scan times in background
- more accurate vulnerability remediation links
- We have lowered our companies risk score from 850 to 660 in less than 6 months.
- We have mitigated over 120,000 Vulnerabilities on our network since using CVM.
- We have been able to streamline/prioritize patch management based off scans CVM provides from our assets.
We run a flavor of multiple products and CVM enhances/complements those tools by pinpointing where the vulnerabilities are at on our network. Intune and Automox being products CVM works well with when its time to patch affected systems. Tenable we used prior to CVM and its product was too complex and clunky and always had issues with asset duplication. CVM simplified vulnerability scanning and made it a lot easier to manage compared to Tenable.
Do you think Cisco Vulnerability Management delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Cisco Vulnerability Management's feature set?
Yes
Did Cisco Vulnerability Management live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Cisco Vulnerability Management go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Cisco Vulnerability Management again?
Yes
Cisco Vulnerability Management Feature Ratings
Evaluating Cisco Vulnerability Management and Competitors
Yes - Tenable was replaced by this product. CVM offered same if not better results for Vulnerability Management and it tied in with our other cisco security tools. After initial trial we found CVM to be easier to use and helped us streamline Vulnerability Management without extra steps like Tenable did. Cost was also a major factor as well Tenable product was far too expensive compared to CVM and at the end of the day CVM proved to be the better product and better price point.
- Integration with Other Systems
- Ease of Use
We were looking for a tool that wasn't clunky and easier to use with our assets. CVM was the right choice as it was not only easy to use, but it integrated very well with other products from our cisco security stack (i.e. Secure Endpoint). Those reasons alone were most important for us at the time.
Wouldn't change a think and feel that if we did CVM would have still been our final choice for Vulnerability Management.
Using Cisco Vulnerability Management
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
Like to use Relatively simple Easy to use Technical support not required Well integrated Consistent Quick to learn Convenient Feel confident using Familiar | None |
- Easy to use interface
- Risk Meters
- Vulnerability details
Comments
Please log in to join the conversation