No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Digital Shadows vs Tenable Security Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Digital Shadows
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Digital Risk Protection (7th)
Tenable Security Center
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (12th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Digital Shadows is designed for Digital Risk Protection and holds a mindshare of 3.7%, down 5.9% compared to last year.
Tenable Security Center, on the other hand, focuses on Risk-Based Vulnerability Management, holds 7.6% mindshare, down 13.6% since last year.
Digital Risk Protection Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Digital Shadows3.7%
Recorded Future10.3%
ZeroFOX10.2%
Other75.8%
Digital Risk Protection
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tenable Security Center7.6%
Qualys VMDR9.8%
Rapid7 InsightVM8.1%
Other74.5%
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

DavidJones7 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Content at Pharmaflow
Has required additional context for alerts but supports monitoring impersonation and threat activity effectively
I do not rate Digital Shadows a nine or ten because there are many things that need improvement. The information we get is kind of generic. For instance, for impersonation, we don't have much detail on their history, when it was used or how it was misused. Those further details would be really helpful, but the information we receive is basic, such as when it was last registered and when it was updated, without more insight about the malicious factors. For basic support from Digital Shadows, my impression is that it is six to seven because many times we see duplications or bugs, and the quality of the alerts is not up to the mark. We have escalated many times, but we do not receive solid responses from them in terms of fixes. Digital Shadows should focus on the engineering side rather than the support aspect because support is there to help us get updates, but in terms of quick fixes, it is not as responsive. The need for improvement lies more with the engineering part in fixing issues, which is linked to support.
reviewer1534134 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Information Security at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
Centralized analytics have strengthened patch visibility and support efficient regulatory reporting
From my experience, I assess the product's analytics capabilities as successful. It helped us significantly with patching and managing the risk of the patching process across all our environments, including network devices with Windows and Unix systems. The product covered several environments and gave us exactly what we needed in our environment. Tenable Security Center's centralized platform helped with risk assessment and management across our IT environments. It covered the patching process, and we previously faced many issues regarding how to patch different environments, how to monitor the patching process, and whether it was successful or not. We obtained good reports showing when patches were closed and the details of each patch, including who executed it and everything related to the patching process until it was closed. This gave us good details about the process which helped us significantly in our reporting and even in audits, whether internal or external. We learned how to close audit issues safely and successfully. We used the dashboards for real-time threat insights and extracted several dashboards from Tenable Security Center. We use these dashboards in our cybersecurity dashboard and committees that we have. These dashboards are part of our committees, especially the cybersecurity committee and other committees that we attend.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most effective feature for threat intelligence, in my opinion, is collecting impersonating websites."
"Digital Shadows helps our organization identify and mitigate cyber threats through their crawling of the internet, gathering information, pivoting it, and then sending those alerts to us which we monitor from our SIEM tool."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are scanning, reporting, dashboards, and automation."
"The valauble feature is compliance reporting system."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the dashboards and speed of the test, and Tenable.sc is user-friendly."
"Tenable SC is good for reporting and alerting. The filtering feature is also very valuable. Its integration with multiple vendors is quite good. It can be integrated with SIEM solutions and PAM solutions such as Thycotic, which is very helpful."
"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."
"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."
"This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products."
"Tenable.sc is user-friendly."
 

Cons

"The solution doesn't pick up all the brands of the URLs."
"The solution doesn't pick up all the brands of the URLs. I have a relatively small company name, however, the solution still misses a certain number of URLs with my company's name in it that are impersonating websites. It's not very comprehensive, to be honest."
"For basic support from Digital Shadows, my impression is that it is six to seven because many times we see duplications or bugs, and the quality of the alerts is not up to the mark."
"The reports and plugins for reports and scans could benefit from enhancements."
"As it is now, integration with new tools has to be developed specifically, so it's not easy."
"The product should provide risk-based vulnerability management."
"Security can always be improved."
"It could be more user-friendly for creating custom reports."
"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."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."
"The solution is expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"For 500 users the licensing fee is roughly $100,000."
"My company needs to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs. The pricing of the solution falls in the mid-range level, so it is not too expensive"
"I use a local license to perform penetration testing and I'm pretty happy with everything when it comes to pricing and licensing."
"We're able to save because we don't have to employ more staff members to help wit ht he scheduling of the scans, running the reports or sending them out to the systems owners. That alone is a big ROI for us."
"The pricing is more than Nexpose."
"Tenable.sc is more expensive than its competitors."
"Tenable SC is priced per asset, with the basic solution starting around US$12,000 for 500 assets."
"Tenable is open-source."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Digital Risk Protection solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Engineering Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital Shadows?
Regarding the cost of Digital Shadows, I think prices are a bit higher. The information provided is already available; some of it is paid information. However, considering all the information they ...
What needs improvement with Digital Shadows?
I do not rate Digital Shadows a nine or ten because there are many things that need improvement. The information we get is kind of generic. For instance, for impersonation, we don't have much detai...
What is your primary use case for Digital Shadows?
Our main use cases for Digital Shadows are mainly using it for threat intel. For instance, we have our domain listed on Digital Shadows. Whenever we see any sort of impersonation domain registratio...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
The price of Tenable Security Center is not so high; it's relatively a cheaper solution.
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
We did conduct a long implementation which relates to what I think can be improved about Tenable Security Center. In some cases, we needed to refer back to Tenable itself, and in other cases, we ne...
What is your primary use case for Tenable SC?
The typical use case for Tenable Security Center is that it is an on-premise solution, and it can use the agent and active scanning, which is needed by governmental organizations and manufacturers,...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Accenture, Pret A Manger, Human Rights Watch
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Recorded Future, ZeroFOX, Proofpoint and others in Digital Risk Protection. Updated: May 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.