We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Skybox Security Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management."The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pros →
"Correlates logs and threats and prioritizes; provides network maps;p provides change result context and resulting vulnerability."
"The most valuable features are the rule compliance and the OS vulnerability checks."
"Skybox deployment is simple, and it's very useful."
"We use Network Assurance for network visualisation and troubleshooting."
"It has a good policy management feature and can provide customers with good quality outputs."
"The port division management was the solution's most valuable aspect for our organization."
"Aside from Firewall Assurance, we are using Network Assurance and Change Manager for an overview of the whole network and for documenting requests and the recertification of the ruleset."
"Security review is the most important feature, because it offers a single pane of glass to analyze multiple firewalls."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"The solution needs to add more automation and orchestration capabilities. Those features would make the solution much stronger."
"The initial setup with Skybox Security is hard. You need one or two strong security engineers on your team."
"There is room for improvement in the technical support."
"Skybox should improve their UX features by making them easier to use."
"Modifications and the deletion of existing policies are currently unavailable."
"Skybox Security Suite's attack surface management feature needs improvement."
"The cloud site could be better. They should provide some use cases to help users."
"The support could be improved."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 10th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while Skybox Security Suite is ranked 17th in Vulnerability Management with 33 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Skybox Security Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) writes "Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skybox Security Suite writes "Efficient in vulnerability management, stable and easy to use ". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM and Tenable Nessus, whereas Skybox Security Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, Tufin Orchestration Suite, FireMon Security Manager, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer.
We monitor all Risk-Based Vulnerability Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.