GFI LanGuard is software used to manage and maintain end-point protection across a network. It provides visibility into all the elements in the network, helping to assess where there may be potential vulnerabilities, and enables the administrator to patch them. It is a patch management and network auditing solution.
N/A
Rapid7 InsightVM
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
InsightVM is presented as the next evolution of Nexpose, by Rapid7. This Insight cloud-based solution features everything included in Nexpose, such as Adaptive Security and the proprietary Real Risk score, and extends visibility into cloud and containerized infrastructure. InsightVM also offers advanced remediation, tracking, and reporting capabilities not included in Nexpose.
WSUS was the other alternative I considered but I believe GFI takes updates, reporting, and functionality to a different level for an enterprise/medium-size business environment.
I think Tenable is very comparable and they are both leaders in this space. I evaluated both of them side-by-side and ultimately decided to go with Rapid7. Tenable did have a slight edge on the amount of information I was getting from the machines, but I landed on R7 because I …
Rapid7 InsightVM is more cost effective than the other solution on the market. It is easy to deploy and the user interface is easy to use and intuative. We select Rapid7 InsightVM mainly because it integrates well with ServiceNow compared to the other solution that were …
Rapid7 InsightVM is a more professional tool than NESSUS because historically, it was based on metasploit which is a powerful pentesting and exploiting tool. InsightVM covers more attacking scenarios and vulnerabilities than competitors and still a leader in this domain.cloud …
Nessus Pro does scans, but does not maintain an inventory from scan to scan. There is no history for a specific device, you have to look inside the results of each scan. Search across inventory is non-existent. There are no dashboards for data analysis. This is no tracking …
Tenable has a more refined look for the reporting that it provides as a result of scanning events, but Nexpose seems to have a better ability to help quantify risk and help prioritize the work needed to get the quickest security result for the team and the company. The Nessus …
-To track the vulnerability level of a windows network. -To push windows and other application updates from a central location. -Produce reports to highlight work being done to protect a network. In some organizations, you may have to prove for audit reasons you are enforcing policies put into place around cyber-security. This software can help you track work done on an ongoing basis for such purposes.
I think Rapid7 InsightVM is well suited for large enterprise customers with a lot of assets. It integrates well with a number of different ITSM solutions which I think is very good. There are not many CIS benchmarking tools on the market and Rapid7 InsightVM does a very good job at benchmarking. I think where Rapid7 InsightVM falls down a little is on false positive vulnerabilities. Sometime you there a few positive results on vulnerabily discovery. Tuning the settings for scan engines can sometimes be trick as well.
The API is also a great tool for us to automate lots of routine procedures like scan and report of asset(s) BY EMAIL.
Tagging. It helps sort out results and reports for respective assets Owner for remediation without a lengthy report including unnecessary information for that particular team.
SQL Reporting. It provides advanced reporting and export capabilities that you can not find in the stock report template.
It could be a bit of information overload which some things are shown can become noise. Maybe different levels of "security" for lack of a better term may be better where you have a summary vs detailed level when it comes to rating the vulnerability of the entire network.
I find I sometimes have issues with PCs on a different network accessed across a VPN where timeouts often occur with very large updates. This aspect can be improved.
Devices found and scanned are never removed. Removal must be done manually with no option for automation.
The database can be fragile. Ours quietly corrupted and progressively degraded until we had to restore and lose 6 months of data. Still didn't fix it and had to be rebuilt again losing all data.
Workflow for delegating remediation is supposed to be helpful, but can also become cumbersome.
Scheduling can become a nightmare if not monitored closely. We found jobs had failed to run because the server had gone offline. When the server came online, it did not try to run missed jobs. Running missed jobs all at once can overload the server, but searching for and launching a large number of missed jobs manually is a pain.
While I think it is a great tool and platform, I believe it (like all tools and solutions) is always evolving and the needs for clients are changing as the industry evolves and threats are upgraded. Cost is good, and support is helpful. Some things could be more granular and others could be easier to understand
I only tried to access there support once and it was a relatively pain-free process. They also have a lot of documentation available online which can be used to learn and tailor the software to suit your needs. It just takes time and effort to plan, execute and monitor going forward.
I gave it a seven due to the functionality and general ease of use after the initial setup headaches, but compared to Qualys, Rapid7 Nexpose falls short on features and ease of use. Their support drags this rating down a point as well. I have gone weeks with no update on semi-critical issues and typically have to make call after call to get a semi-coherent response.
WSUS was the other alternative I considered but I believe GFI takes updates, reporting, and functionality to a different level for an enterprise/medium-size business environment.
I think Tenable is very comparable and they are both leaders in this space. I evaluated both of them side-by-side and ultimately decided to go with Rapid7. Tenable did have a slight edge on the amount of information I was getting from the machines, but I landed on R7 because I found the features of the InsightVM tool to be more useful. They both get the job done, but I found InsightVM a better experience to use on a day-to-day basis and had better quality of life features that I was looking for.
Certainty. It allows you to know where on your network needs attention.
Peace of mind. As security professionals, we can only put the necessary things in place to prevent malicious persons from exploiting a network. The software allows you to know whether or not your risk of exploitation is high or low. and if high what to do with it.
It certainly has a more positive impact than negative impact while performing the scans. Nexpose can find report vulnerabilities that our other scanner fails to identify during the scan because of its defined scan templates.
Also, even if the scan is not being performed due to some issues like reachability, whitelisting, etc. it will try to give scan results unlike QualysGuard which just marks the asset as unreachable.
