We performed a comparison between CloudPassage and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)."I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"Out of all the features, the one item that has been most valuable is the fact that Wiz puts into context all the pieces that create an issue, and applies a particular risk evaluation that helps us prioritize when we need to address a misconfiguration, vulnerability, or any issue that would put our environment into risk."
"Policies are very easy to manage on a day-to-day basis."
"Key features are the Software Vulnerability Assessment and the CSM, which is the configuration check."
"Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports."
"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."
"Tenable.sc's best features are the availability model, accident management, and scoring."
"The Auto-Remediate feature is good."
"The tool gives us fewer false positives. Compared to its competitors, the solution’s reports are more accurate."
"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."
"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."
"We're looking at some of the data compliance stuff that they've got Jon offer. I know they're looking at container security, which we gonna be looking at next."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"The reporting isn't that great. They have executive summaries, but it's only a compliance report that maps all current issues to specific controls. Whether you look at one subscription or project, regardless of the size, you will get a multipage report on how the issues in that account map to that control. Our CSO isn't going to read through that. He won't filter that out or show that to his leadership and say, "Here's what we're doing." It isn't a helpful report. They're working on it, but it's a poor executive summary."
"We would like to see improvements to executive-level reporting and data reporting in general, which we understand is being rolled out to the platform."
"The only small pain point has been around some of the logging integrations. Some of the complexities of the script integrations aren't supported with some of the more automated infrastructure components. So, it's not as universal. For example, they have great support for cloud formation and other services, but if you're using another type of management utility or governance language for your infrastructure-as-code automation components, it becomes a little bit trickier to navigate that."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
"Given the level of visibility into all the cloud environments Wiz provides, it would be nice if they could integrate some kind of mechanism to better manage tenants on multiple platforms. For example, let's say that some servers don't have an application they need, such as an antivirus. Wiz could include an API or something to push those applications out to the servers. It would be great if you could remedy these issues directly from the Wiz platform."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"The reports and graphs are unintuitive."
"Of all the advertised functions, I only find two things that really work in my environment, even though I wanted to use all of them. They're not flexible enough to be used."
"Anything outside of the software vulnerability management and the CSM, things like the GhostPort, need some improvement. The dashboard is in beta. It looks really good, I wish it would come out of beta."
"In the CSM module the policies are really hard to work with it. It is not very flexible at all. I would suggest that they change that. Right now, the scan is based on the group that the server is in. What happens if the server is in multiple groups?"
"A good plugin editor would be a good additional option for the Security Center."
"It's good at creating information, it's good creating dashboards, it's good at creating reports, but if you want to take that reporting metadata and put it into another tool, that is a little bit lacking."
"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."
"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."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"The reporting side can be improved. The dashboards are nice, but exporting things out for reports for management was a little tough."
"The pricing is reasonable, but this could be brought down more aggressively, such as we see with Rapid7, Tenable SC's main competitor."
"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."
Earn 20 points
CloudPassage is ranked 43rd in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) while Tenable Security Center is ranked 10th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 48 reviews. CloudPassage is rated 8.0, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CloudPassage writes "CloudPassage has a bunch of features. Be sure you understand all of them and how to extract value to your organization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". CloudPassage is most compared with , whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Forescout Platform.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) 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.
