No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs FortiCNAPP comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Vulnerability Managem...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (22nd)
FortiCNAPP
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (33rd), Container Security (26th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (17th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (21st), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (17th), Compliance Management (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is designed for Risk-Based Vulnerability Management and holds a mindshare of 2.3%, down 2.4% compared to last year.
FortiCNAPP, on the other hand, focuses on Vulnerability Management, holds 1.8% mindshare, up 1.2% since last year.
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)2.3%
Qualys VMDR9.8%
Rapid7 InsightVM8.1%
Other79.8%
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
FortiCNAPP1.8%
Wiz4.5%
Qualys VMDR3.9%
Other89.8%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

AshishPaliwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Self-employed at Self-employed
Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability
An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite. There are a lot of GRC suites available, like Archer, MetricStream, Rsam, Protiviti, for example. So how would a solution like this work if my company has already invested thousands or maybe millions in a GRC solution? Do I still need it and how does it fit into an existing SAP environment? There could be interoperability, having more data sources, integrating Splunk, Qualys, FireEye, Rapid7, Carbon Black. I'm sure all that can be done to an extent, with a little more insight and a little more accuracy on the industry numbers and trends. I'd like the solution to offer any sort of assistance in any way with the remediation part, not just identification of vulnerability risk, and that is second.
Mark Freeborough - PeerSpot reviewer
Client Manager at MLL Telecom Ltd
Network segmentation has strengthened access control and now streamlines automated threat response
The most valuable features in FortiCNAPP include robust network segmentation and restricting access to network assets. It also supports security measures by leveraging security fabrics for better enforcement and policy enforcement. FortiCNAPP integrates with SIEM solutions, and we offer different SIEM options that work with Fortinet and AlienVault, among others, providing multiple scenarios.FortiCNAPP's automated policy recommendations significantly help improve security measures as part of an overall service wrap. When deploying a Fortinet SD-WAN or network, these tools provide greater visibility to vulnerabilities and enhanced security on the network. It functions as a proactive tool, enabling me to identify threats quickly and automate responses.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature; that is what it is used for and then data from different sources can be fed into it, and they have good dashboards, risk meters, and virtualization."
"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."
"The machine learning capability in Lacework FortiCNAPP is used for threat detection, and automated policy recommendation helps to improve my security measures in general."
"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."
"FortiCNAPP is a competitive and robust solution, the only one in the IT sphere that addresses all quadrants in the Gartner Quadrants."
"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use, as well as some levels of machine learning anomaly detection that they have that can detect pivotal anomalies faster."
"What I personally appreciate about FortiCNAPP is that I think it is a good product and a good firewall because it usually offers many options for the company."
"The most valuable feature, from a compliance perspective, is the ability to use Lacework as a platform for multiple compliance standards. We have to meet multiple standards like PCI, SOC 2, CIS, and whatever else is out there. The ability to have reports generated, per security standard, is one of the best features for me."
 

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"Lacework has not reduced the number of alerts we get. We've actually had to add resources as a result of using it because the application requires a lot of people to understand it to get the value out of it properly."
"Lacework lacks remediation features, but I believe they're working on that. They're focused on the reporting aspect, but other features need to improve. They're also adding some compliance features, so it's not worth saying they need to get better at it."
"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."
"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."
"In general, I would not recommend Lacework right now. There are more mature solutions that would be a better fit."
"The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly."
"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
"Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."
"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?
The pricing is a mediator compared to other products; it is not that much higher and not much lower than other products, making it a very affordable price.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
Policy implementation is quite complex, and the stability will take more time for the solutions. There is definitely room for improvement in policy implementation.
What is your primary use case for Lacework?
FortiCNAPP is mainly used from a security point of view. Some VPNs charge for their solutions, but Fortinet provides a free-of-cost VPN solution, making it more reliable and cost-effective for clie...
 

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
Polygraph, FortiCNP, Lacework
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransUnion
J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Horizon3.ai, Tenable and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: May 2026.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.