Medigate, Armis, Zingbox or ORDR? Why Choose Securolytics Instead!​

Medigate Armis Zingbox ORDR featured image4
Medigate, Armis, Zingbox, ORDR and other vendors, including Securolytics, can all help to discover and secure IoT devices.

But, what do these solutions do? How do they work? And, how do they differ?

Maybe you have already researched unmanaged medical and IoT device security risks.  And you may have come across expert publications on the topic from the likes of FDA or NIST.  Or, you read about IoT Security from other industry analysts such as EY, Deloitte, PwC , Travelers or Gartner.   

Perhaps you checked out the Top 10 IoT Threats research from  OWASP or one of our own blogs on Medical / IoT security vulnerabilities.

Let’s say you are warming up to Gartner’s recommendation that real-time discovery, visibility and control are critical to address IoT security

Now, you may want to sort out the IoT security market and determine which vendors to talk with.

So, what do IoT security solutions have in common and how do they compare?

Core Capabilities of IoT Security Solutions

Securolyics and other IoT security solutions like Medigate, Armis, Zingbox or ORDR all provide greater device visibility and threat detection.  And, they can leverage that new level of information in with existing tools.  In general, they provide:

  • Device Visibility

    • Discover and Identify devices by make and model number to know what is on the network and where it is on the network.
    • Device Communications, both internal and external communications
  • Passive Threat Detection

    • Device-Level, Passive Monitoring to detect suspicious, malicious and anomalous device behavior
    • CVE/CERT Mapping that alerts when device is on the network that has come under a security advisory
  • Integration and Control

    • Integrating device identification detail into solutions such as NAC, SIEM, Asset Inventory, Help Desk solutions, Firewalls, etc.  This is to support automated asset inventory and network access, network segmentation, mitigation and remediation decisions that leverage existing tools and workflows.

Core Technology Differences

As with any solution such as  Medigate , Armis , Zingbox , ORDR or others, vendors will each have feature differences. And, vendors may add new features at different rates.  To that end, feature focus is not the focus here.  For this discussion, we are focused on core technology differences and what Securolytics does that is unique and better vs. most other vendors.

First, a quick summary comparison, followed by a more detailed discussion.

medigate armis zingbox ordr technology comparison

Deployment & Data Privacy Differences

Most competitive solutions such as Medigate, Armis, Zingbox and ORDR commonly deploy with network TAP/SPAN Ports to collect needed data. 

Common deployment Using Network TAP/SPAN Ports

Medigate Armis Zingbox ORDR post deployment graphic

Network TAP/SPAN port deployments can create some significant concerns for organizations.


Increased Data Privacy Risks
  •  With network TAP/SPAN Ports, vendors collect private, sensitive network packets / PHI into their solution. Vendors can claim that they filter out private/sensitive data and only send metadata to their cloud for analysis. The question is: Do you trust the vendor to do that and do it 100% of the time?
Increased Expense, Deployment and Maintenance
  • Network TAPS can be expensive, and even more so in larger environments. This can involve locating and configuring all the switches needed to ensure that all traffic is being captured from all devices. Then, data collectors will need to be bought, installed and maintained for each TAP. This can be a massive undertaking.  As an option, you could also spend extra money to license and maintain a traffic aggregator solution to feed the data into the vendor’s solution. Perhaps less work, but expensive nonetheless.
Increased Switch Load & Network Performance Risks
  • The risk here is that the switch can become taxed with duplicating the packets to send to the vendor’s solution. This can cause network performance issues.
Limited Discovery & Device Identification
  • Since competitive systems rely on actual network traffic for data, they can only see devices where the network has been tapped. So, you’ll need on-going planning and work to ensure that traffic from all devices is being captured. Devices that encrypt data transmission can also represent a limiting factor to device visibility and profiling.  Also, SPAN ports are known to drops packets on oversubscribed ports. They can also be easily misconfigured / turned off which can further limit device profiling.

Why Securolytics? No Network TAP/SPAN Deployment

Securolytics Centralized Deployment

medigate armis zingbox ordr-securolytics deployment

The Securolytics solution does not use network TAP/SPAN ports.  A PoC deploys in a few minutes using a single IoT Security appliance.  A single appliance is all that is needed for most enterprises.

The deployment is simple:

1) Connect the IoT Security Appliance anywhere on the network.  It only collects non-sensitive data to profile devices.  Get results in 72 hours or less.  This is all that is needed to conduct a proof-of-concept deployment.

2) For a full deployment, simply provide DNS and DHCP logs. These logs do not contain sensitive data and collection is commonly done in less that 1 hour.

The Securolytics approach vs. a Network TAP/SPAN deployment delivers these benefits:

  • Greatly accelerates and simplifies deployment and on-going maintenance
  • Typical deployment requires only one (1) appliance per organization, regardless of the number of locations
  • Reduces Costs and Risks
  • Keeps your private data…Private!

Threat Detection Differences

Medigate, Armis, Zingbox and ORDR Provide Passive Monitoring and Security Advisory Mapping, but what about Active Inspection?

Medigate, Armis, Zingbox or ORDR and most competitive solutions focus on passive behavior monitoring and on mapping CVE/CERT advisories to devices on the network while leaving active inspection for traditional vulnerability scanners. The problems with traditional vulnerability scanners on IoT are:
    1. They are weak in detecting IoT-specific threats like default credentials, VXWorks and more.  For example, default credentials  are the #1 IoT threat described in the OWASP Top 10 IoT Threats.

    2. They are too intrusive to run on resource-constrained IoT devices.  Scanning IoT devices can result in device interference or crashes.  In turn, this can increase IT workload and leave devices untested.

    3. Scanners are usually scheduled to run periodically and are not real-time.  Since IoT devices are commonly deployed by users and departments without IT, vulnerable IoT devices can be on the network for some time before or even if IT ever knows about it. Some competitive solution can integrate with vulnerability scanners to feed them device detail, but the problems in 1 and 2 above are still present.

    But, is it possible to do Active Inspection without device interference and in real time?
  • Yes, with Securolytics PortSafeTM Inspection!

Why Securolytics? Enter PortSafeTM - Unique , Safe Active Inspection Designed for IoT

Like competitive solutions, Securolytics also does passive monitoring and security advisory mapping to devices on the network.  But, the difference is Securolytics PortSafeTM Inspection.  

PortSafeTM provides new and unique capabilities to conduct active, but safe inspection on sensitive IoT devices.  As a result, you can now do vulnerability testing on IoT , like medical devices, that would otherwise need to be excluded from intrusive vulnerability scans.

Unlike traditional vulnerability scanners that use brute force testing, Securolytics PortSafeTM  first understands what the device is and how to safely test it, before any testing occurs.  With this knowledge, it can then gently test the device to detect IoT vulnerabilities precisely, intelligently and non-intrusively. 

PortSafeTM Inspection – No Device Interference

To date and with millions of devices that are inspected continuously, Securolytics has yet to receive any customer reports of ever interfering with any device…even sensitive medical devices. This includes customers like a 9,000 bed healthcare system and a 35,000 employee healthcare system which has one of the top 10 largest hospitals in the U.S. These healthcare systems inspect medical devices with Securolytics.

PortSafeTM is also configurable so that organization can customized which devices are inspected, or inspection can be disabled completely.

And, it includes unmatched default credential detection to provide coverage for the #1 IoT threat described in the OWASP IoT Top 10.

Integration & Operationalization Differences

Integrating Device Detail & Threat Data

Most IoT Security solutions, like Medigate, Armis, Zingbox and ORDR and others, including Securolytics, provide integration capabilities.  Integration capabilities feed device detail and/or threat data into systems like NAC, SIEM, Firewalls, Asset Management, IT Service Management, etc. It helps to support activities such as segmentation, device blocking and creation of automated security policy. However, the scope of mitigation commonly applies to only threats detected through behavior monitoring or security advisory mapping. 

What’s Missing with Competitive Solutions? IoT-specific vulnerabilities that are only be detected by active inspection.

Why Securolytics? Securolytics creates mitigation policy for both passive, behavioral threats and Portsafe TM active inspection results

This is where Securolytics takes it a step further, beyond protection for just behavioral threats.  Securolytics also creates mitigation policy based on PortSafeTM Active Inspection

  1. It finds IoT-specific vulnerabilities though its active but safe vulnerability inspection that competitive systems and vulnerability scanners commonly miss.
  1. It creates a compensating control to mitigate those threats – with No Downtime.
After Securolytics identifies vulnerabilities, it can automatically create a mitigation security policy that gets passed to the NAC, firewall or switch.

Cost Differences

Securolytics typically reduces costs by 30% or more vs. most competitive solutions.

In addition, Securolytics further reduces the costs and administrative overhead that goes along with network TAP/SPAN port deployments and on-going maintenance.

Ready to check out a FREE assessment to baseline your IoT footprint and security posture that takes just minutes to deploy?

Or, check out our IoT security products in more detail

Disclaimer-Securolytics is not a representive of nor affiliated or associated with Medigate, Armis, Zingbox, ORDR or any other IoT security solution or vendor.

Vulnerable libssh Embedded Into Critical IoT

ZDNet has reported that a security flaw in libssh “leaves thousands of servers at risk of hijacking.” (CVE-2018-10933) This was a well written article.  However, we believe Catalin Cimpanu, the author, understated the actual risk to organizations when he said “most servers, IoT devices, and personal computers [use the non-vulnerable] openssh instead of libssh.” Read more “Vulnerable libssh Embedded Into Critical IoT”

Medical IoT Devices Named Top Security Threat

Last week our content manager, Mindy Affrime, sent me an article about the risks associated with Medical IoT Devices. The article caught my attention because of the author.  It was published by the Cyber Security Engineering Department at the University of San Diego.  The article names four areas they believe “will be particularly vulnerable to cyber attack[s]” in 2017. Read more “Medical IoT Devices Named Top Security Threat”

The Internet of Insecure Things

Frost & Sullivan highlights 5 IoT growth areas for 2017

It’s May already, and analysts have begun thinking ahead and considering how the rest of this year is likely to shape up in terms of IoT growth.  IoT cybersecurity is on everyone’s mind.  The Frost & Sullivan report, European Internet of Things Market Outlook 2017, published this week, predicts that the next evolution in IoT will be ‘sentient tools’ and ‘cognitionor predictive computing.’ Read more “The Internet of Insecure Things”

Forrester Predicts Massive IoT Data Breach

Last week, Forrester, one of the world’s most influential research and advisory firms, released its “Predictions 2017: Security and Skills Will Temper Growth of IoT” report. “IoT holds the promise to enhance customer relationships and help drive business growth, however, it brings multifaceted complexity”, the report states. Read more “Forrester Predicts Massive IoT Data Breach”

Dark Reading Quotes Securolytics on IoT Bots

Last week’s massive DDoS’ denial of service attack took down a good portion of the Internet, using webcams and DVRs. To put it mildly, it made a mess on the Internet. Major sites like Spotify and Twitter and PayPal were ground to a halt. Reddit, AirBnB, Etsy and the New York Times were paralyzed. They are estimating that six thousand websites were overwhelmed in a cyber-attack launched with a sea of webcams and DVRs quietly taken over and weaponized for attack. Yes, this is new… but more important it shows how vulnerable the internet has become with IoT devices being so vulnerable. Read more “Dark Reading Quotes Securolytics on IoT Bots”

IoT’s Rough Patch

According to a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers, almost 70% of connected IoT devices lack fundamental security. According to analyst firm IDC, “the number of IoT devices will grow from approximately 6 billion in this decade to 28 billion in 2020 — a staggering number. The market for wearable smart devices alone is expected to increase at an average rate of 60% per year to $20 billion in 2017.”

In this third installment of Securolytics’ series on IoT device security, we look at a major issue with IoT devices, the software patching process. Or often, the lack thereof. Read more “IoT’s Rough Patch”

Is Your Network Safe From IoT Cybercrime?

The second in Securolytics IoT Security Blog Series

According to a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers, almost 70% of connected IoT devices lack fundamental security. According to analyst firm IDC, “the number of IoT devices will grow from approximately 6 billion in this decade to 28 billion in 2020 — a staggering number. The market for wearable smart devices alone is expected to increase at an average rate of 60% per year to $20 billion in 2017.” Read more “Is Your Network Safe From IoT Cybercrime?”

The State of IoT Security

The team at Securolytics is excited to present the first of our blog series on IoT Security.

There is no Technology Security issue that has more people talking and businesses struggling for solutions. Why? Simple- IoT is a real security risk for businesses and no one is predicting that the need for IoT security is slowing down soon. There are estimates that there will be in use- 20 billion total IoT devices by 2020. Read more “The State of IoT Security”