GFI LanGuard Reviews

The primary function for GFI LanGuard is as a patch solution, which updates all of my software. My second use is to perform vulnerability scans to give me insight into my network, and how it is looking. I also use it to check on the open ports, as well as to have visibility in terms of what is running on every user's machine.

The most valuable feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions.

The visibility that it gives me is not just on the endpoints, but also on mobile devices.

The documentation on how to use this solution in a Linux environment is not clear, which is something that should be improved because it is complicated.

In the next release, I would like to see more support for pushing custom software.

I have been using GFI LanGuard for five years.

The current version is very stable and we appreciate it because it has improved from past versions, where it was not as good. This solution is used perhaps three or four times per week. It gives a lot of insight as to what is happening on our machines.

Our users are content with the way the solution is functioning, so we do not have plans to increase our usage at this time. In the future, we will eventually expand it.

This is a very scalable product and I really like it. We have about 110 devices that are covered by LanGuard.

I opened a case with technical support and the person who was assisting me was very helpful. I was able to resolve my problem in minimal time.

I was using ManageEngine prior to GFI LanGuard, but we switched because it gave us much more visibility and control. ManageEngine had a limitation where it would only support Microsoft Update.

The initial setup is easy and something that you can manage. The installation took place over a single day. Apart from the ports that have to be opened and the exclusions that need to be made in the firewalls, there is not much in terms of installation issues.

The part that takes time is the patching process because it is more vigorous, and it keeps repeating.

I performed the installation myself and I have a team of three engineers who help with the maintenance. 

We evaluated Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM) but we found that it had almost the same limitations as ManageEngine in that it could not patch third-party applications.

This is a solution that I recommend. In fact, those without it are at a disadvantage when it comes to managing their network.

The biggest lesson that I have learned is in terms of visibility. GFI LanGuard has given me a wakeup call in terms of what is happening on endpoint machines. However, it is more than just having visibility. It is about having control in terms of what you want to block and what you're able to block. It keeps our network stable in that there are no running applications that you don't even know you have.

 I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use case for us is for patch management.  

The most valuable feature is the vulnerability information pertaining to all of the components of the network. It is good for the information that we can collect from each workstation.  

The main improvement that the manufacturer should consider is to make it so this solution will not be limited to the local area network only. Currently, it is limited to only the LAN. If there was an option for managing workstations or servers outside the LAN, that would be a great improvement. This option could be enabled by having a means of the roaming work station to the central management dashboard or to the server. That, for us, is the most important feature that is missing.  

We have been using this product for about three years.  

GFI Languard is very stable.  

The product is pretty scalable.  

I had only about two occasions when I needed to contact GFI customer support and they were very helpful and quick.  

While we still use this product, we are currently considering switching to another product, so it really is the other way around. It is not that the product is bad. The main reason for considering making the change is because the solution is limited only to the LAN, and I have many remote users who are not on my LAN. So while I can do patch management or configuration management, and vulnerability assessment on the devices on the LAN, I cannot do it for these roaming users. That is the main reason for considering changing the solution.  

The initial setup is somewhere between difficult and complex. The installation itself is straightforward, but you do need to do some configuration in order to get a proper view of all your computers and devices on the network. So it is not very complicated, but it is also not just simple and straightforward.  

I really don't know which products in the patch management category to compare LanGuard to directly, but generally, GFI LanGuard has very fair pricing compared to other similar solutions out there. It is very fair and the product is very good.  

I currently have experience with only this one patch management system, GFI LanGuard. I am considering switching to a new system, and I wanted to compare GFI LanGuard to IBM BigFix to be sure it will improve our company. At this point, I am only at the stage of collecting information.  

I would recommend this product to people considering it as long as they were only going to be using it for a local area network only. In that case, it is a great solution at a great price.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate GFI LanGuard as an eight out of ten.  

The thing that I learned using this product is that you need to be very organized and fastidious in order to make the most of the tool and get the full clear picture of your network.