We performed a comparison between Bridgecrew and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft, Wiz and others in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)."In cases where they have automatic remediations, you can click a button and it'll just fix the configuration for you."
"New users don't have too many problems with the product. They have a lot of training documentation around it."
"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 important features are the dashboard and reporting. The dashboard provides statistics with graphs and bar charts for our management."
"Tenable is the leading product for vulnerability scanning."
"Their overall cost of service is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the vulnerability assessment."
"The solution is very intuitive and the dashboards are simple to use."
"Has a great advanced scanning feature."
"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."
"We'd like to see better monitoring and the ability to deny certain resources from being scanned."
"The biggest issue that I see companies run into is that they immediately think that, "Oh, this solution will be right, simply due to the name." But that's the same issue Splunk runs into. People will immediately jump to Splunk being the best SIEM tool, just because they're the largest. When in reality, QRadar, LogRhythm, and all these other ones are performing similar functions and would actually fit better in some people's environments. Therefore, it's important a company does its homework and does not assume one size fits all."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"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."
"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."
"We are facing some challenges related to our channel."
"Support could be faster."
"The solution should include compliance-based scanning."
"The product could be user-friendly, and they could enhance the web application's security features."
Bridgecrew is ranked 21st in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 2 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Bridgecrew is rated 8.0, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bridgecrew writes "Multi-cloud, good scanning, and offers extensive guides". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Bridgecrew is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.
