Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Tenable Security Center comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management.
To learn more, read our detailed Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."

More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pros →

"It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability.""One of the most valuable features is their distributed scan model for allotting engines to work together as a pool and handle multiple scans at once, across multiple environments. Automatic scanning distribution is a distinguishing feature of their toolset.""Has a great advanced scanning feature.""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 scans are the most valuable aspect of this solution.""The most valuable features of Tenable SC are scanning, reporting, dashboards, and automation.""Compared to other products, the most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and ability to provide visibility over scan results while providing many templates to users, making it a helpful tool.""Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports."

More Tenable Security Center Pros →

Cons
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."

More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →

"If I want to have a very low-managed scan policy, it's a lot of work to create something which is very basic. If I use a tool like Nmap, all I have to do is download it, install it, type in the command, and it's good to go. In Security Center, I have to go through a lot of work to create a policy that's very basic.""Tenable SC could improve by making the creation of the initial reports easier that correspond to our network.""A good plugin editor would be a good additional option for the Security Center.""The product could be user-friendly, and they could enhance the web application's security features.""The solution needs to improve its support. I would like to see a bird's eye view of my network architecture. I would also like to see the continuous view feature in the tool.""Deploying Tenable.sc is highly complex because it's an on-prem solution, whereas Tenable.io is cloud-based, so you can go live as soon as you log in. Tenable.sc involves significant integration with other on-prem solutions, and the deployment takes about two to three weeks with the help of a system integrator""The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time.""There's a lot of information being streamed out of the reports. What would be nice, and maybe we just haven't found it, would be more of an executive-type view. We still expect it to collect all this information, but we would like a feature that would allow us to show it to an executive or a director or someone like that and give them some type of high-level overview but not get into the nitty-gritty."

More Tenable Security Center Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
  • More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is slightly more expensive than other solutions in the same sphere."
  • "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 licensing costs for this solution are approximately $100,000 US, and I think that covers everything."
  • "The pricing is more than Nexpose."
  • "Costing is pretty reasonable compared to the competition."
  • "We're a Fortune 500 company... our licensing costs [are] in the seven figures."
  • "We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."
  • "The price can start at €10,000 ($13,000 USD) for between 500 and 1,000 assets, and the price can climb into the millions as more assets are added."
  • More Tenable Security Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature.
    Top Answer:I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based. If you have 10 computers versus a million computers, obviously the pricing will change.
    Top Answer:An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite. There are a lot of GRC suites available, like Archer, MetricStream, Rsam, Protiviti, for example. So how would a solution like… more »
    Top Answer:Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports.
    Ranking
    Views
    669
    Comparisons
    463
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    498
    Rating
    8.0
    Views
    14,633
    Comparisons
    11,183
    Reviews
    25
    Average Words per Review
    390
    Rating
    8.3
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
    Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
    Learn More
    Overview

    Cisco Vulnerability Management equips you with the contextual insight and threat intelligence needed to intercept the next exploit and respond with precision.

    Prioritization is no longer a dark art—it's data science. Advanced algorithms, combined with rich internal and external intel, offer recommended fixes that will lower risk in as few moves as possible.

    Track vulnerability fluctuations and forecast weaponization with up to 94% accuracy, giving you the chance to remediate high-risk vulnerabilities before bad actors can mount an attack.

    With more than 19 threat intelligence feeds at your fingertips, you gain a comprehensive view of emerging threats, shifting trends, and your own risk profile.

    A single source of data-verified truth aligns security and IT, eliminating friction and freeing up resources. And intuitive, simplified risk scores help you generate reports anyone can understand.

    Get a risk-based view of your IT, security and compliance posture so you can quickly identify, investigate and prioritize your most critical assets and vulnerabilities.

    Managed on-premises and powered by Nessus technology, the Tenable Security Center (formerly Tenable.sc) suite of products provides the industry’s most comprehensive vulnerability coverage with real-time continuous assessment of your network. It’s your complete end-to-end vulnerability management solution.

    Sample Customers
    TransUnion
    IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company22%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Insurance Company8%
    Retailer7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm31%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Manufacturing Company15%
    Computer Software Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization16%
    Government12%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise67%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business34%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise48%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise55%
    Buyer's Guide
    Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 10th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 47 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) writes "Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "Reliable, useful reports, but initial report configuration could improve". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VMDR, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM, Skybox Security Suite and Tenable Nessus, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus.

    See our list of best Risk-Based Vulnerability Management vendors.

    We monitor all Risk-Based Vulnerability Management 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.