We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Rapid7 InsightVM 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 →
"This solution is very easy to use and easy to install."
"The reports in Rapid7 InsightVM are useful when compared to competitors."
"The product's initial setup phase was very easy."
"The cost is what is most valuable. Compared to the other products on the market, the cost is more palatable."
"When you connect any new device to the network, Rapid7 has the ability to detect the new device immediately. It can scan that device to detect if it has any vulnerability. It tells you what is vulnerable and what has been misconfigured. It also tells you what is the risk of that misconfiguration or lack of patches and how to resolve the problem."
"The most valuable feature is the vulnerability scan."
"The ease of deployment and configuration allows users to onboard quickly."
"It's a relevant management tool."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"Rapid7 could be easier to manage."
"A definite improvement would be to make it easier to run ad-hoc scans without needing to assign the asset to a site or group."
"The drawback is that it is still not a fully SaaS solution, so you must deploy a console."
"There are end-user needs and expectations that are being overlooked in the development that could be addressed by appointing a customer advisory board."
"The on-premise updates could improve from Rapid7 InsightVM."
"The reporting could be better."
"There have been instances where technical support takes a long time to update the status of a ticket, which is something that can be improved."
"The team needs to improve the speed and focus on the new bandwidth feed. Sometimes, it takes a while to scan, especially with new updates."
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 Rapid7 InsightVM is ranked 4th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 55 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Rapid7 InsightVM is rated 8.0. 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 Rapid7 InsightVM writes "You can scan a network, and receive recommendations to address vulnerabilities with the click of a button". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM, Skybox Security Suite and Brinqa, whereas Rapid7 InsightVM is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Lacework.
See our list of best Risk-Based Vulnerability Management vendors.
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.