We performed a comparison between Icinga 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."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"The best thing about the solution is how it highlights errors, the issues, and what needs my attention. The solution directs me to areas that I should look for first."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"There's a module called Icinga Director, which helps us configure the product using an intuitive interface through clicks instead of creating a text configuration. It's very helpful for us."
"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."
"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 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."
"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."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"The user interface should be improved."
"It needs Trap SNMP. I saw the documentation for Zabbix, that it has its own built-in product which handles SNMP traps, and there's nothing similar in Icinga or Nagios. I think this feature is most important for me."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
More Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Icinga is ranked 22nd in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Network Monitoring Software. Icinga is rated 7.6, while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Icinga writes "A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification". 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". Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Centreon, 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.
