We performed a comparison between Aruba ClearPass and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."Authentication capabilities are one of the most valuable features."
"The continuous server and posturing are valuable."
"Aruba ClearPass is a simple solution for customers to see what is happening on their network."
"The customized modules for guests, the self-registration and login, one license for all, no license for guest users, and the self-integration of sandbox integration are the most valuable features."
"The visibility and security features are most valuable. We get a clear view. It is a very secure product for educational institutions."
"Aruba is a highly scalable product. It just works. We have no issues with scalability."
"We are able to satisfy many different organizational needs because of its flexibility."
"A mature and functional product."
"We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data."
"The predictive prioritization features are pretty good. They do a lot of research and we trust the research that they do internally. They have knowledge of what's going on with many companies, where we only get a view into what's going on here. So the ability to get best practices out of them as part of this solution, is valuable to us."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are the reports and the dashboards."
"The feature we've liked most recently was being able to take the YARA rules from FireEye and put them into Tenable's scan for the most recent SolarWinds exploit. That was really useful."
"Compared to other products, the most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and ability to provide visibility over scan results while providing many templates to users, making it a helpful tool."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are scanning, reporting, dashboards, and automation."
"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."
"This product has the best results in terms of the lowest number of false-positives and false-negatives."
"The scalability could improve."
"Configuration should be more easy to understand between the link of two topics."
"The platform's API integration could be better. Additionally, its pricing could be affordable."
"The user interface could be more polished and modern. It would be useful to have more options for automation."
"The licensing model could be improved."
"In the next version, I would like to see some enhancement or extension on the tracking side. For example, when any user enters the network, it should be more visible in the graphical form."
"Instructions on adding layouts are not as clear as they could be."
"Licensing cost is extremely high."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."
"The reporting needs a lot of work on the template."
"Tenable SC could be improved with additional connectivity to external company postures and the capability of managing and sustaining agents in the systems directly without additional platforms in the middle."
"The GUI could be improved to have all concerns and priorities use the same GUI, allowing them to see all tickets, assign vulnerabilities, and assign variation failures to each member of their team."
"The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time."
"The user interface can be improved."
Aruba ClearPass is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control (NAC) with 75 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 8.6, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba ClearPass writes "Easy to use, multifeatured, and reliable policy management platform for identity authentication and new device onboarding". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, Microsoft Intune and Varonis Platform, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.
