We integrated Unified Vulnerability Management with the FortiGate firewall, and as of now, there are no challenges found. It is very easy to implement Unified Vulnerability Management with the FortiGate firewall.

The best feature of Unified Vulnerability Management is that it never shows actual details publicly and provides different virtual information to those coming from outside the company. It does not give any actual information about any companies, making it very safe for any organization to protect their networks, which is why it is in high demand right now.

Improvements are necessary because Unified Vulnerability Management has been in the market for only seven or eight years, and a lot of improvement must be required for performance. Automatic scaling is needed, especially since sometimes a data center can be down, particularly in certain geographical locations.

I have been familiar with Unified Vulnerability Management for around five years, and as of 2020, it has been almost six years.

Regarding implementation, I can say it is moderate, not easy and not very difficult. It should be a knowledgeable person who can deploy it easily, but for a non-knowledgeable person, it is difficult. I did not face any problems.

Deployment for Unified Vulnerability Management may take a couple of months after planning, which takes about one and a half months. After planning, the deployment is a one-day job. Impact analysis, reviewing changes, and risk analysis take time, but with proper planning, the job for deployment will take one day.

Currently, for Unified Vulnerability Management implementation, there are five members taking care of the operations and three members for the monitoring.

I purchased Unified Vulnerability Management directly from Zscaler, not from AWS Marketplace.

We do use automated scanning, and it will generate a report if any of our organization's assets have some unauthorized software that is non-compliant. Based on the report, we will work on understanding why it is non-compliant and what the reason is for its installation on end user assets, and we will mitigate that.

I have not yet used Unified Vulnerability Management's remediation workflow tools, but we are working on it right now as that project is ongoing.

About pricing, it is higher compared to others because Unified Vulnerability Management is demanding and more secure than other products since it does not give actual information of the customer, so it is a bit expensive. Organizations should choose to work on the pricing.

I rate this solution an 8 out of 10.

Unified Vulnerability Management provides a good overview and detailed visibility into all traffic, allowing me to easily identify bottlenecks or issues.

The platform's ability to generate customizable compliance reports is valuable because they are always available, and I can request the latest report with the most current data and upload it directly from the platform.

Risk-based prioritization is very important for my resource allocation.

Unified Vulnerability Management gives a good overview and detailed visibility of all traffic, which allows me to easily find bottlenecks or issues.

The platform's ability to generate customizable compliance reports is excellent because they are always available, and I can request the latest report with the most current data and upload it from the platform.

Risk-based prioritization is very important for my resource allocation.

More AI features would be welcome, and the price should be lower because it is becoming more expensive, and customers are already looking for alternatives because of the pricing.

I have been familiar with Unified Vulnerability Management for almost three years.

I have not encountered any complexity that caused delays or issues with integration, though this depends on the person involved during the implementation.

Unified Vulnerability Management's support could always be better, and it would be beneficial to have an external party providing that service. I understand that Unified Vulnerability Management is exploring external parties to provide support as well. Currently, I would rate the support a seven.

Implementation is provided by Unified Vulnerability Management in my customer's environment. The time for implementation varies depending on the customer, but on average, it takes a few hours. More people are needed for implementation, and a project manager is assigned. It is necessary to have at least basic knowledge of the product, otherwise it is difficult to handle it easily.

Implementation is provided by Unified Vulnerability Management in my customer's environment.

More AI features would be welcome, and the price should be lower because it is becoming more expensive, and customers are already looking for alternatives because of the pricing.

We use a private cloud, though I am not certain which vendor it was purchased from and need to verify. I have not used Unified Vulnerability Management's remediation workflow tools. My overall review rating for Unified Vulnerability Management is eight.

Our major use cases for Unified Vulnerability Management include user identity, endpoint management, security management for endpoints, authentication, and authorization. We also use it to filter internet traffic from end users.

Based on my experience, the visibility and zero trust that Unified Vulnerability Management provides brings the biggest benefit.

The scanning in Unified Vulnerability Management helps with vulnerability management by scanning applications and users' internet-bound traffic as well as data center traffic. It flags anomalies and measures against known vulnerabilities, known CVEs, and vulnerabilities, making it a process of filtering, scanning, and reporting of anomalies.

We are using the automated scanning feature in Unified Vulnerability Management.

Regarding the ability of Unified Vulnerability Management to generate customizable compliance reports, it is adequate, but sometimes you still need to be able to filter whatever the report generates to ensure accuracy and have a baseline on what the report provides. You should be able to filter and also take action on critical and non-critical reports. You get a lot of reports, but filtering them is essential.

The negative side of Unified Vulnerability Management is that you need a skill set that is not readily available. You require a lot of training and personnel that understand the technology, so getting the skill set is a major issue for managing the technology.

The scanning in Unified Vulnerability Management helps with vulnerability management by scanning applications and users' internet-bound traffic as well as data center traffic. It flags anomalies and measures against known vulnerabilities, known CVEs, and vulnerabilities, making it a process of filtering, scanning, and reporting of anomalies.

Unified Vulnerability Management is generally stable, although we experienced latency issues once, but it has been fixed, and so far, it has been good.

Unified Vulnerability Management is scalable.

The technical support from Unified Vulnerability Management is adequate, but not as robust as Cisco; we still experience delays.

Regarding improvements to support, the response time could be better, but not the quality of support.

I would rate the support from Unified Vulnerability Management at six out of ten points.

Comparing Unified Vulnerability Management with Cisco, there are crucial differences. For Cisco, you have more skilled engineers available to manage Cisco enterprise and technologies, but for Unified Vulnerability Management, you require training and a specific skill set. Support from Cisco is better from my experience.

The deployment process of Unified Vulnerability Management is straightforward because it primarily involves cloud support or deployment with few changes to the infrastructure.

We used an integrator for the deployment of Unified Vulnerability Management, so it is a mix of mostly integrator and consultant for quality assurance, along with in-house contributions.

I see a very high return on investment with Unified Vulnerability Management.

The ROI with Unified Vulnerability Management is approximately 60 percent so far, given one year in the deployment. We have used Unified Vulnerability Management for less than one year, so I would say 60 percent so far.

Regarding pricing for Unified Vulnerability Management, it is expensive; pricing is another issue.

I would rate the price of Unified Vulnerability Management at nine out of ten points.

For remediation, we do it manually, which is handled by another team. We have not used the remediation workflow tools in Unified Vulnerability Management.

The integration capabilities of Unified Vulnerability Management impact our overall IT security strategy positively. It integrates seamlessly with other systems and applications using APIs, and we do not have issues with integration, even with tools to generate tickets and reporting.

Risk-based prioritization is important for our resource allocation. When you refer to critical and non-critical vulnerabilities, we know what to focus on and what to tackle at any point in time.

With risk-based prioritization in Unified Vulnerability Management, it makes attention-driven decisions possible. We eliminate critical vulnerabilities as soon as possible using an agile process. Other vulnerabilities are worked on based on availability, so critical ones come first, then low and medium risks follow. It is really important.

I would rate this review at seven out of ten points.