Rapid7 InsightVM vs. Symantec Client Management Suite

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.

Incentivized

If you are looking for a client management suite to perform patch, software delivery, and inventory I think Symantec is great. I would recommend it without a doubt if it was in your budget. If you are a very small company and don't use these features to often then I think it would depend on your budget.

• 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.

Incentivized

• The best part is it provides you with the full view of your client life cycle of devices, along with the integration of other Symantec products like endpoint security.
• Creating an audit report and keeping it in a single dashboard is also easy. UI is simple.
• One of the best benefits of this tool is you can install it enterprise-wide along with onsite employees.
• Symantec is having great customer support.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• CMS is quite clunky sometimes and the Silverlight interface is acceptable at best. Many improvements have been made in this area, particularly with performance, but the interface still needs a lot of work. When it becomes 100% HTML5 with proper compliance browser support I'll be happy!

Incentivized

So far so good - no major issues with that technology.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Support at Symantec isn't that great. Client Management Suite isn't even listed on the Support Portal when trying to open a ticket. Your best bet for support is actually the user groups that Symantec hosts. The members of the groups are usually very responsive. With Broadcom buying Symantec, I've seen a huge jump in personnel leaving Symantec, so I'm assuming the support is just going to get worse. Recently for a simple question, I reached out to 5 people just to find out 4 of the 5 had left the company.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Currently, I can't take a position [on how Symantec compares] because when I took position at my job, Symantec Client Management Suite (CMS) was already implanted. We're currently looking to try Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager to see if it'd be a contender for CMS. The reason is that we have special support contract directly with Microsoft. So instead of managing multiple contracts, we would only have one. But for now, we're all set up with Symantec so it'd take something great from SCCM to make us switch from one to another.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Better efficiency through image creation, deployment and EOL as single Hardware Independent Images can be created for a large number of devices and then all managed on the same pane of glass.
• Customer service is better because we can provide software across campus almost as fast as requested for one user or hundreds of users, all by a single technician without ever having to leave an office.

Incentivized