CyCognito vs
Qualys

CyCognito doesn’t rely on what you know to find what you don’t.

• CyCognito discovers the entire attack surface with no limit on size or asset count
• CyCognito requires zero-input, zero-seeds, zero configuration, and zero onboarding
• CyCognito uses OSINT-based reconnaissance techniques to attribute and contextualize the entire attack surface and identify unknown unknowns
• CyCognito users can filter and find assets based on categories based on asset type, technology, and metadata like attractiveness to attackers, discoverability, PII collection, sensitive data, related applications and more

Qualys cannot keep up with your dynamic attack surface.

• Qualys limits the initial asset discovery process to only 1,000 assets, a small fraction of the average enterprises’ attack surface
• Qualys requires customers to input seed data and configure filters to start discovering assets and fails to identify the unknown unknown assets that create the bulk of exposures
• Qualys requires manual tagging and curating to fully contextualize assets
• Qualys’ tagging and asset categorization system has been criticized by analysts as overly complex and difficult to manage**

CyCognito finds everything with no gaps because it starts by mapping your organization and continuously updates it as your business changes.

• CyCognito uses natural language processing, machine learning, and a graph data model to automatically map the organization, and identify subsidiaries
• CyCognito goes beyond owned environments, covering web applications, data centers, SaaS, IaaS, partners, brands, acquired companies, joint ventures, and cloud environments

Qualys’ discovery misses unknown unknown assets and key asset types.

• Qualys does not create a map of the organization and does not automatically discover subsidiaries, making it more likely that unknown unknowns stay undiscovered
• Qualys’ discovery process focuses on domains and subdomains, leaving other key asset types, especially those related to identities, in the dark***

CyCognito actively and non-intrusively tests for 10,000s of CVEs with more than 90,000 tests.

• CyCognito’s automated, unauthenticated security tests span 35+ categories, including DAST, WebApp OWASP Top 10, weak credentials, exploitable vulnerabilities, and data exposure
• CyCognito’s testing engines cover 100% of your exposed attack surface on customizable cadences, even for attack surfaces that contain millions of assets and tens of thousands of web applications – no additional products or integrations required

Qualys makes security teams choose between limited passive testing or disruptive agent-based testing.

• Qualys’ EASM solution offers no active testing and focuses primarily on noisy passive scanning, leaving most of your attack surface in the dark and untested
• Qualys requires additional modules, like VMDR and Web Application Scanning, to test externally exposed assets using agents

CyCognito’s single source of truth scales your red team and makes your pen-testing budget go further.

• CyCognito’s suite of 90,000+ unauthenticated automated remote checks reduces repetitive work
• CyCognito provides the coverage, accuracy and frequency required to understand gaps in security posture

Qualys leaves red teams wasting time on asset discovery and basic tests.

• Qualys’s reliance on passive testing and vulnerability management integrations misses real risks and leads to false positives
• Qualys relies on seed data for discovery and can’t find unknown unknowns, leaving the riskiest assets in the dark and untested

CyCognito’s prioritization considers asset attractiveness to attackers, business context, targeted threat intelligence, and results from 90,000+ tests.

• CyCognito’s next-gen prioritization algorithms identify less than 0.01% of issues as critical, focusing your teams on the top risks to your attack surface
• CyCognito prioritizes every issue alongside verifiable evidence of exploitability, enabling a >60% reduction in MTTR, often days instead of weeks
• CyCognito’s comprehensive asset discovery ensures every potential risk is assessed and prioritized

Qualys misses key context, assets, and issues, leading to ineffective prioritization.

• Qualys’ EASM module lacks the active testing results needed to identify truly exploitable risks
• Qualys relies primarily on passive scanning and fails to account for factors like discoverability and asset attractiveness, slowing MTTR
• Qualys’s inadequate asset discovery means many assets are missed and aren’t prioritized

CyCognito’s remediation tools help security teams work more efficiently.

• CyCognito’s Remediation Validation feature automatically checks if a remediation attempt has been successful
• CyCognito’s Remediation Planner tool builds remediation plans to improve the security posture of organizations and their subsidiaries

Qualys’s lack of remediation validation and planning tools slows MTTR.

• Qualys’ EASM alone cannot validate remediation success, requiring manual followup
• Qualys lacks the ability to build a remediation plan to guide systematic improvements