Healthcare cybersecurity · IoMT / device risk
Asimily
Asimily is an IoMT and connected-device risk platform for health systems. It inventories medical devices on the network and helps biomed and security teams prioritize remediations. It is not a clinical identity or SSO product.
Strong fit
- Health systems where biomedical engineering and security teams together want to list connected medical devices and rank their risks
- Teams that can act on findings about weaknesses and device use without taking clinical equipment offline needlessly
- Organizations comparing medical device security vendors on risk ranking and how fixes are handled
Weak fit
- Buyers whose main need is clinician sign-in and single sign-on, which is Imprivata's area
- Organizations with no biomedical engineering owner to fix devices
- Teams that want to block everything, even if clinical equipment goes down
Bottom line
Asimily is worth using for hospitals that want to manage the security risk of connected medical devices and will have biomedical engineering and security teams fix problems together. Buyers whose main concern is identity and access should look at Imprivata instead.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Asimily manages the risk of connected medical devices, often called the internet of medical things. It competes most directly with Claroty and Cynerio, so buyers should compare them on how many devices they find, how well they rank risks, and whether biomedical teams can patch or separate devices on the network without disrupting care.
The results that matter are a full device inventory, risks ranked by priority, and fixes completed without taking clinical equipment offline. Getting there requires visibility into the network and clear workflows for the people who own each device. Pricing is set for each organization.
When you evaluate it, ask for evidence of how risk ranking accounts for how devices are used and how fixes are tracked, not only counts of known weaknesses.
Among the healthcare cybersecurity tools we review, Asimily scores just below Cynerio. Its score is solid in a crowded group of similar products, with implementation and pricing clarity typical of enterprise software.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Asimily | 7.2 | 6.8 |
| Claroty | 7.5 | 7.1 |
| Cynerio | 7.3 | 7.0 |
| Imprivata | 7.8 | 7.4 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | A license for the device security platform, often based on the number of devices or sites. |
| What usually drives cost | How many devices and sites are covered, the network sensors or collectors needed, and consulting services. |
| What to ask before you buy | The cost for your estimated number of connected devices, with the people responsible for fixes named before you buy. |
| Published pricing | Asimily does not publish prices. Expect a custom quote, and confirm the total cost for your number of devices. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Asimily to function | |
| Biomedical engineering and security staff working from the same list of fixes | These tools fail when requests bounce between teams. |
| A way to see the network so connected devices can be found | If devices are not found, the risk scores mean nothing. |
| Written limits on when clinical devices can be taken offline for fixes | Blocking everything disrupts patient care. |
| An estimate of how many devices you have, for pricing | Quotes without a device estimate go wrong. |
| Willingness to act on ranked risks, not only look at dashboards | Security tools that go unused are common. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Start with devices used for the sickest patients | Early wins build trust with biomedical engineering. |
| Link risk scores to how much each device is used where possible | Devices nobody uses should not drive the most worry. |
| Track completed fixes and exceptions every month | Fixes that stay open forever wipe out the value. |
| Schedule changes with clinical departments | Unannounced patches cause new problems. |
| Compare similar device security vendors on how the work gets done, not on customer logos | Claroty and Cynerio do much the same job. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You mainly need clinician sign-in and single sign-on, as Imprivata offers. | |
| No one in biomedical engineering will fix devices. | |
| Leadership wants to block everything, with no rules to keep clinical equipment running. | |
| There is no way to find devices on your network. | |
| Security staff will only look at dashboards, not finish the fixes. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | From signing to kickoff | 3-8 weeks for security review, network design, and bringing in biomedical engineering |
| 2 | From kickoff to first use | 8-16 weeks to find devices and see their risk at a first site or area |
| 3 | From first use to steady results | 4-9 months of fixing risks across all connected devices |
Leadership
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.