Healthcare cybersecurity · IoMT & clinical device risk
Cynerio
Cynerio is a healthcare cybersecurity product for IoMT and clinical device risk. Hospitals use it to see infusion pumps, imaging gear, and monitors on the network and to prioritize what to fix. It is aimed at device-heavy hospitals, not small ambulatory clinics.
Strong fit
- Health systems with many connected infusion, imaging, and monitoring devices
- Security teams that need to rank device weaknesses by their effect on patient care
- Hospitals whose medical devices and IT systems still share one network
Weak fit
- Outpatient groups with few connected medical devices
- Buyers who only need threat detection on the laptops they manage
- Organizations that will not bring biomedical and clinical engineering into the rollout
Bottom line
Cynerio is worth using for hospitals that know their infusion pumps and imaging equipment sit on the network and can be attacked. It suits security teams that will work closely with biomedical engineering. Small outpatient groups with few connected devices do not need it.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Cynerio protects connected medical devices in hospitals, such as infusion pumps and imaging equipment. These devices sit on the network and can be attacked.
Results depend on how well it finds devices and whether clinicians accept how it ranks their risks. The product is strong at understanding medical devices.
Setting it up needs a partnership with biomedical engineering, not only a license for the security team. Pricing is in the range of specialized healthcare security software.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Cynerio | 7.3 | 7.0 |
| Claroty | 7.5 | 7.1 |
| Asimily | 7.2 | 6.8 |
| Imprivata | 7.8 | 7.4 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Usually priced by beds, sites, or the number of devices found. |
| What usually drives cost | Network sensor hardware and setup services. |
| What to ask before you buy | The total cost compared with the cost of a clinical device outage, not with the price of consumer antivirus. |
| Published pricing | Cynerio does not publish prices. Expect a custom quote, and confirm the total cost at your volume. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Cynerio to function | |
| A real number of connected medical devices (infusion, imaging, monitoring, and similar) | A tool for finding devices only pays off if there are devices to find. |
| Biomedical or clinical engineering as a partner in the rollout | If only the security team owns it, it misses how devices are used and when they can be changed. |
| Network access for sensors or to see traffic | Without a view into the clinical network segments, the device list stays incomplete. |
| A way of deciding what to fix first, backed by the security chief, that clinicians accept | Lists of weaknesses that ignore the effect on care get ignored. |
| Willingness to separate networks or fix devices once they are found | Finding devices without fixing anything is an expensive way to make a list. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Risk rankings based on where the device is and how it affects care | Knowing which ward a device is on makes the ranking useful. |
| Shared IT and biomedical engineering tickets for patches and other protections | Separate IT and biomedical work lists leave the same gaps you bought the tool to close. |
| Test one clinical network area before putting sensors everywhere | This shows early how well it detects devices and how many false alarms it raises. |
| Reports to executives on how many critical devices are exposed over time | Boards keep paying for the work when they can see the backlog shrink. |
| Compare the total cost with the risk of a device outage, not with consumer antivirus | Comparing with the wrong prices kills useful security programs. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You run outpatient sites with few connected clinical devices. | |
| You only need threat detection on the laptops you manage. | |
| Biomedical and clinical engineering will not take part. | |
| You do not plan to separate networks or fix devices once they are found. | |
| Network teams will not give the access needed to see devices. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | From signing to kickoff | 3-8 weeks for network design, placing sensors, and bringing in biomedical engineering |
| 2 | From kickoff to first use | 8-16 weeks to find devices and see their risk in a first clinical area |
| 3 | From first use to steady results | 4-9 months to make separating networks and fixing devices routine across sites |
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.