We performed a comparison between Cisco SecureX and IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is its ability to manage all the applications and visibility. For example, if there is malware, spam, or another component that wants to attack the company in my servers, network, or applications, then SecureX will react to the problem."
"Using SecureX, a tool provided by Cisco, we can easily integrate it with many of our other Cisco products such as Cisco ISE and many networking devices."
"The most beneficial feature of Cisco SecureX for cybersecurity efforts is its integration with other Cisco solutions and the environment. This sets it apart, as its APIs and overall integration capabilities are very strong. Additionally, its detection capabilities are commendable."
"The automation and orchestration tools are the most valuable features."
"Integrates well with our existing security infrastructure."
"I like that I don't have to jump around to five different products and log into five different places to view the data that it returns."
"It has evolved a lot, just that monitoring piece to the current Orchestrator piece. The additional analytics are there. They now have something called Insight, which can basically take data from Microsoft Azure AD and Intune to give us information about our endpoints. This is detailed information about the endpoints, from Secure Endpoint and all these different products. So, it is just constantly evolving. Every time that it evolves, we have more information with more visibility. There are more features that we have that just make everything so much easier, and it is in one place. I don't have to keep going back and forth. I don't have to go to Secure Endpoint and ISE to get the data. I don't have to go to Intune on Microsoft to get the information. It is all in one place."
"The ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"The reporting features are good and there are many built-in reports that can be quickly configured."
"It helped with some of the regulatory requirements. It also helped with some of the security analytics and analysis. It was worthwhile from that perspective."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides a simple English recommendation on actions that you need to take once a vulnerability is discovered."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"Enhancing automation capabilities could further improve the product."
"what's missing right now is the multi-tenant capability."
"Remediation stuff could be integrated into the product's automation."
"If they could make the Cisco Umbrella piece a little bit more advanced or easier to manage, that would help. We use it for filtering and when you compare it to a normal content filter, it lacks some functionality."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"They could expand into more areas. The more third-parties that we have tied into it, the better. The capabilities are there. As they just continue to involve the product, the more things that you can look into, then the more analytics that you can get. Also, the more data that we can get, then the better off we will be."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
"Building policies is not that easy. There are some things that are turned off by default, for example, displaying values."
"It was not as easy to use. The user-friendliness of it was somewhat lower than what I was expecting. It was also lacking in terms of the ease of the setup. There should be an automatic agent for deployment."
"The interface could be improved by having sub-groups of tests, ultimately making the process of collecting tests faster."
More IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco SecureX is ranked 16th in Vulnerability Management with 13 reviews while IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is ranked 41st in Vulnerability Management with 3 reviews. Cisco SecureX is rated 9.0, while IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Cisco SecureX writes "Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment writes "Worthwhile from the regulatory requirements and analytics perspective, but is expensive and not easy to use". Cisco SecureX is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Trend Vision One, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Splunk SOAR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Orca Security and Acunetix. See our Cisco SecureX vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all 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.