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 →
"The ease of deployment and configuration allows users to onboard quickly."
"I like Rapid7's scan optimization options."
"I rate InsightVM eight out of 10 for ease of setup. It takes two or three engineers to deploy. The solution requires some maintenance. It's mainly cleaning up data."
"It is good and fits well with pretty much all of our use case needs."
"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."
"It's easy to use. It's fast, it's a powerful easy to access tool."
"The most valuable features of Rapid7 InsightVM are the accurate level of scanning and the workflows are good."
"The solution works well."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"The authentication scan is not working."
"The drawback is that it is still not a fully SaaS solution, so you must deploy a console."
"Rapid7 InsightVM, has impressive capabilities, especially when it comes to managing video equipment. However, we've noticed that Rapid7 also offers a cloud solution called CloudSec, and we don't have that. We think it would be better if InsightVM had all the features for both on-premise and cloud management."
"They should integrate the solution with multiple products."
"The solution needs to improve its vulnerability design to include CVC results."
"Their customer support should be improved, and the effectiveness of scans also needs to be improved."
"The on-premise updates could improve from Rapid7 InsightVM."
"The InsightVM cannot scan if we connect to our customer by the VPN."
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 SecurityScorecard.
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.