We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that."
"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"What is useful to me is being able to fulfill very customized scanning policies. In the clinical environment, because of vendor control, we can't perform credential-vulnerability scanning. And network scans, which I've done before, can cause a lot of impact. Being able to create very customized policies to be able to routinely scan and audit our clinical networks, while simultaneously not causing impact, is important to us."
"Tenable.sc's best features are the availability model, accident management, and scoring."
"Tenable also helps us to focus resources on the vulnerabilities that are most likely to be exploited. And since it is continuously updated, it allows us to reevaluate quickly if there are new vulnerabilities found..."
"We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data."
"The tool gives us fewer false positives. Compared to its competitors, the solution’s reports are more accurate."
"The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs."
"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."
"I found the dashboard features very useful. It made it easy to track remediation progress. I could publish dashboards to remediation teams and track the progress on the dashboards."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."
"There is not much room for improvement. However, there should be a guide that describes the step-by-step procedures for doing tasks. Otherwise, training is required from a senior guy to a junior guy."
"The solution's user interface has some issues."
"Security can always be improved."
"The solution should include compliance-based scanning."
"The tool's initial configuration is not so easy."
"I think the vendor training provided for Tenable.sc could be a lower price. It's quite expensive for the training."
"The web application scanning area can be improved."
"Tenable SC can improve by making it easier to create complicated reports and have more effectiveness in the remediation area for comparison between the scans."
Acunetix is ranked 14th in Vulnerability Management with 26 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai. See our Acunetix vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
