NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG vs Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] comparison

"The real-time troubleshooting and application segregation that you can do within it."

"It allows us to get quicker resolutions. We can see exactly what is using up the bandwidth, so we can assist end users."

"It has cut our troubleshooting down by days. Once we have a product in place, we show people examples of how it can streamline their troubleshooting process."

"The tool has the ability to look back within a month's data. It is very easy to navigate within the tool and troubleshoot the problem, compared to other solutions that we've used in the past."

"The most valuable feature is utilization."

"The technical support is really good. They will go above and beyond, if you are running into a problem. You can go to a sales engineer, who will engage technical support to help you out."

"The product is stable. I have never had any issue where we have lost an InfiniStream, or visibility from that particular InfiniStream, throughout the bank."

"The most valuable features are speed and cost."

"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."

"The scanning itself is really the core of the tool, and it's what we're most interested in."

"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."

"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 NetFlow Collectors could handle more flows per minute."

"The technology goes end-of-life on us every year, which is why I am looking forward to vSTREAM. I don't like when devices go end-of-life on us so quickly. If we can get more of an advanced notice of when an end-of-life is brought up, because our certification process within the organization takes a while."

"I'd like them to make the product more user-friendly."

"The stability depends on who is using the tool, because you only can get as much out of the tool as you put into it. There are a lot of patches for this particular environment, so you have to keep on them. If you lose track of them, then the product is not useful anymore."

"The single pane of glass feed still needs work."

"It's not able to communicate with our probes."

"The scalability has some limitations and quirks to it. I would like to be able to upgrade rather than replace the whole thing."

"Only problems that we have had are fiber issues going into the TAPs or vSTREAMs, which are usually local site issues."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"I would like it to be more scalable with less spend."

"This product could be cheaper."

"It can be scalable. It just costs too much. With a company as big as ours, it gets too expensive to accommodate every single site."

"The scalability is good, but it comes at a cost. E.g., if you need 100 InfiniStream because you are sending gigs or terabytes of data to one InfiniStream, then you will have to purchase another InfiniStream, which are not cheap."

"To capture more with the solution that we bought, you have to buy another InfiniStreamNG, and there are only four ports in the back."

"The price is a little high."

"We did a three-year deal where the cost is amortized over the three years. The Elite Support was an additional cost to the standard licensing fees... If you use Security Center, most of the time it is on-premise, so you're going to have some sort of infrastructure to build out and there's going to be a cost associated with that."

"Pricing-wise, it's fine. It's not an expensive product. That's not an issue."