In our comparison of Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect, ThreatConnect is the best option with a higher overall Wheelhouse Score. Wheelhouse Score uses a combination of feature and pricing comparison data, average user ratings, and editorial reviews to score software vendors on a scale of 1-10.
* Vendor does not share prices.
* Vendor does not share prices.
The product effectively helps me identify vulnerabilities and issues in applications and infrastructure. By providing solutions, it enables me to address these vulnerabilities and improve the security posture of our systems. The comprehensive tracking capabilities assist in proactively managing cyber risks.
I appreciate the multiple tracking options available in the product, including assets, compliance, vulnerabilities, risk factors, active vulnerabilities, top risks, and trends. These features allow me to stay on top of my application and infrastructure vulnerabilities effectively, supporting my role as a cyber ninja.
One drawback I've encountered is the inconvenience of filters. It would be beneficial to have a way to save filters for future use, as this would enhance efficiency and ease of use.
For a small team, ThreatConnect proved effective in scaling and managing enterprise threat intelligence and threat hunting capabilities. However, as the complexity of Playbook design and integration increased, the software's potential was hindered, preventing the team from fully maximizing its benefits.
ThreatConnect offered the ability to gather, analyze, enhance, and distribute various types of data related to cybersecurity incidents and indicators of compromise across different customer environments. It allowed for tasks such as uploading a domain name, checking it against threat feeds, and enriching the data with additional information like news articles, reports, attribution, and determining the domain's prevalence across multiple client setups.
One of the drawbacks we encountered was the confusion and lack of proper documentation regarding the Playbooks that facilitated enrichment and integration with third-party tools like SIEM. The visual representation of coding concepts, where blocks were connected to one another, was intended to assist non-programmers in developing their capabilities. In reality, a more code-centric approach to Playbook development would have been more beneficial. We found ourselves with numerous questions and minimal guidance on how to address simple problems that could be easily tackled using Python.
The product provides observability and a centralized view of vulnerabilities across assets. The dashboard, equipped with numerous out-of-the-box filters, enables quick report generation and insights into all assets. The risk score feature is particularly helpful in prioritizing workloads.
I appreciate the vulnerability overview with different classifications and the ability to filter by environment and project. The interface is user-friendly, requiring minimal training. The template section is helpful for understanding different vulnerabilities and the CWSS score. Additionally, the ease of downloading asset lists in various formats and the centralized view of vulnerabilities and compliance are valuable features. The integration with SSO adds convenience.
While the documentation is good, providing university/academy classes to learn how to use the tool, especially for customization of reports and integration with enterprise tools, would be beneficial. Some minor enhancements to the preference section, such as retaining filters and scope, would also improve the user experience.
Consider this risk management system that offers numerous possibilities for effortless detection of high-risk threats and a platform for record-keeping.
It is convenient for any company to efficiently prioritize potential high-risk issues. Additionally, it simplifies record maintenance, and ThreatConnect facilitates easy threat detection through actionable analysis.
There were no significant issues encountered during the implementation of ThreatConnect, and it even facilitated learning about the tools.
The product effectively helps me identify vulnerabilities and issues in applications and infrastructure. By providing solutions, it enables me to address these vulnerabilities and improve the security posture of our systems. The comprehensive tracking capabilities assist in proactively managing cyber risks.
I appreciate the multiple tracking options available in the product, including assets, compliance, vulnerabilities, risk factors, active vulnerabilities, top risks, and trends. These features allow me to stay on top of my application and infrastructure vulnerabilities effectively, supporting my role as a cyber ninja.
One drawback I've encountered is the inconvenience of filters. It would be beneficial to have a way to save filters for future use, as this would enhance efficiency and ease of use.
The product provides observability and a centralized view of vulnerabilities across assets. The dashboard, equipped with numerous out-of-the-box filters, enables quick report generation and insights into all assets. The risk score feature is particularly helpful in prioritizing workloads.
I appreciate the vulnerability overview with different classifications and the ability to filter by environment and project. The interface is user-friendly, requiring minimal training. The template section is helpful for understanding different vulnerabilities and the CWSS score. Additionally, the ease of downloading asset lists in various formats and the centralized view of vulnerabilities and compliance are valuable features. The integration with SSO adds convenience.
While the documentation is good, providing university/academy classes to learn how to use the tool, especially for customization of reports and integration with enterprise tools, would be beneficial. Some minor enhancements to the preference section, such as retaining filters and scope, would also improve the user experience.
For a small team, ThreatConnect proved effective in scaling and managing enterprise threat intelligence and threat hunting capabilities. However, as the complexity of Playbook design and integration increased, the software's potential was hindered, preventing the team from fully maximizing its benefits.
ThreatConnect offered the ability to gather, analyze, enhance, and distribute various types of data related to cybersecurity incidents and indicators of compromise across different customer environments. It allowed for tasks such as uploading a domain name, checking it against threat feeds, and enriching the data with additional information like news articles, reports, attribution, and determining the domain's prevalence across multiple client setups.
One of the drawbacks we encountered was the confusion and lack of proper documentation regarding the Playbooks that facilitated enrichment and integration with third-party tools like SIEM. The visual representation of coding concepts, where blocks were connected to one another, was intended to assist non-programmers in developing their capabilities. In reality, a more code-centric approach to Playbook development would have been more beneficial. We found ourselves with numerous questions and minimal guidance on how to address simple problems that could be easily tackled using Python.
Consider this risk management system that offers numerous possibilities for effortless detection of high-risk threats and a platform for record-keeping.
It is convenient for any company to efficiently prioritize potential high-risk issues. Additionally, it simplifies record maintenance, and ThreatConnect facilitates easy threat detection through actionable analysis.
There were no significant issues encountered during the implementation of ThreatConnect, and it even facilitated learning about the tools.
Add suggested to comparison
In our rating and review comparison of Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect, Nucleus has 17 user reviews and ThreatConnect has 2. The average star rating for Nucleus is 4.29 while ThreatConnect has an average rating of 3.5. Nucleus has more positive reviews than ThreatConnect. Comparing Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect reviews, Nucleus has stronger overall reviews.
Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect both offer a strong set of features and functionality including Cybersecurity Features, Cybersecurity Protection Types, Reporting & Analytics, Workflow Automation, Drag-and-Drop Builders/Designers, Collaboration Tools, Reminders/Alerts, Report Management, Systems/Administrative, Customizable Items, Integration Options, Compliance Accreditations, After-Sales Service. In our feature comparison of Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect, ThreatConnect offers more of the most popular features and tools than Nucleus.
In our pricing comparison of Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect, ThreatConnect's pricing starts at N/A/month and is more affordable compared to ThreatConnect's starting cost of N/A/month.
Our comparison of Nucleus vs. ThreatConnect shows that ThreatConnect scores higher in usability for ease of use, meets requirements, ease of admin. Nucleus scores higher in learning curve, but ThreatConnect has the best scores overall for system usability.
Get your personalized recommendations now.
