We performed a comparison between Azure Bastion and Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The interface is available in the edit portal."
"The product's setup is easy."
"The connection to virtual machines is very useful."
"The most significant advantage lies in its runbook features, particularly beneficial for our infrastructure team."
"The ability to operate the product with scripting is excellent."
"It provides all the security to us. Without getting on the internet, we can access our servers. We can access our desktop through our web browser. We don't need to run the mstsc command and login to the VM. All those things are not required."
"Azure Bastion makes it easy to provide quick virtual machine access to our customers."
"As an Azure consultant, for me, it is the best way to give the administrator access as you can manage the permission - including who can access Bastion."
"We can manage everything with only a single console on the Tenable SecurityCenter. We can pull and define the policy. We can perform every task on the Tenable SecurityCenter."
"The next big one is supportability. In a large enterprise, we have many types of technologies. The technology we previously had didn't even support authentication to a lot of those technologies."
"The first of the valuable features is how easy it is to access all of the information that's gathered from the assessments... With a lot of other technologies, like Rapid7, if you're using Nexpose you effectively have to be a DBA to get some of the lower-level results from the scans. And Qualys wasn't very intuitive."
"Through porting, we can see how the improvement is happening over a period of time. We can see the overall scenario from the last year, where were we were and where we currently stand."
"The scanning itself is really the core of the tool, and it's what we're most interested in."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We are not able to copy and paste files directly into the server over the patch host. We have to transfer files over to Azure Storage."
"The solution breaks down sometimes."
"The protocol speed could be faster."
"You are charged for retrieving your own data."
"When you have a boot issue on Windows, you cannot use Azure Bastion to fix it. You have to use the Azure console or the VM console, and it is very limited."
"There are some challenges because Bastion is more compatible with Edge but not with the other browsers. As an organization, it doesn't make sense that we have to use only Edge. We should be able to access Bastion over Chrome, Mozilla, or Opera. It should be our choice."
"While general support is valuable, having a detailed breakdown of the specific issues would contribute to a more streamlined and efficient resolution process."
"In terms of what could be improved, some customers have a problem with SecurityCenter's ticket system. If I want them to assign one of the issues, they may want to assign someone to it or to assign it somewhere else and I may want to break up the ticket."
"There are certain circumstances where they may have found a vulnerable service and they just removed the service completely from the device because nobody was using it. There's no way to go into SecurityCenter and mark it, to say, "This is no longer an issue. It doesn't exist anymore." Or, "The risk was accepted for one year, so let's not report it as 'high' until that one year period is done." The handling of operational flow around vulnerability management could be improved."
"When it comes to... dynamic application scanning, I think they are lagging behind the curve. They have a lackluster solution, to the point where I think they need to determine, as a company, whether or not that's a space they even want to play in."
"One area which is missing is cloud security because there are a lot of configurations. Rapid7 has a product called a DV cloud. I would like to have a similar kind of solution and feature."
More Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Azure Bastion is ranked 33rd in Network Monitoring Software with 8 reviews while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Network Monitoring Software. Azure Bastion is rated 8.8, while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Bastion writes "Has good scalability and provides secure access to the virtual machines ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] writes "Provides the best network-based vulnerability scanning, but the dynamic scanning is lackluster". Azure Bastion is most compared with Azure Firewall, Azure Front Door, TeamViewer Remote Management, Microsoft Sentinel and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, whereas Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.