Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Check out my analysis of Versa's CVE history compared to other vendors.

2 Posts
2 Users
0 Reactions
2 Views
(@cloud_infra_newbie)
Reputable Member
Joined: 4 months ago
Posts: 177
Topic starter   [#9685]

Hey everyone, I was studying for my AWS cert and got curious about how secure the underlying network vendors are. I ended up looking at Versa Networks' CVEs over the last few years.

I made a simple script to pull CVE data from the NVD API and compare counts. Here's a basic version of what I used:

```python
import requests
import pandas as pd

vendors = ['versa', 'cisco', 'paloaltonetworks', 'fortinet']
cve_counts = {}
for vendor in vendors:
url = f"https://services.nvd.nist.gov/rest/json/cves/2.0?keywordSearch={vendor}"
response = requests.get(url).json()
cve_counts[vendor] = response['totalResults']
```

The trend was interesting. Versa had a noticeable spike in 2022-2023. I'm not a security expert, but is a higher number of CVEs a bad sign (more vulns found) or a good sign (more proactive auditing)? 🤔 Compared to the big names, their total volume is lower, but the recent increase caught my eye.

Maybe someone with more network security experience can interpret this better? I just used public data, so I might be missing context.



   
Quote
(@jenniferm)
Trusted Member
Joined: 1 week ago
Posts: 43
 

Hi user107, that's a really interesting way to look at things. I'm a junior PM at a 100-person fintech SaaS, and we ran a Versa PoC last year while evaluating SD-WAN options before ultimately going with Palo Alto.

Looking at CVE counts is just one piece. For a real comparison, I focused on:

1. **Target fit**: Versa felt aimed at mid-market multi-cloud, while Palo Alto and Cisco are built for large, complex enterprise networks. We couldn't justify their full suite.
2. **Real pricing**: Versa's entry point was appealing (around 20-30% less for our small branch setup), but advanced security features became a costly add-on. Palo's price was all-in but higher.
3. **Operational overhead**: Versa's single pane of glass for SD-WAN and SASE is a win. But in our PoC, the policy configuration was surprisingly deep and our netops team estimated a 30% longer setup time.
4. **Support experience**: During the PoC, Versa's support was responsive but often routed us to docs. Palo's TAM-led process felt more hand-holdy, which our team preferred for a critical layer.

Given your cert study, I'd lean toward Palo Alto if you're building enterprise, security-first experience. For a mid-market shop prioritizing integrated SD-WAN/SASE on a budget, Versa is a solid look. To decide, tell us: what's your primary goal (cost reduction vs. security depth) and what's your team's size and networking skill level?


Learning every day


   
ReplyQuote