We performed a comparison between Pentera and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
"The product is easy to use."
"What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."
"The product is our second solution, and we are happy that it meets our requirements."
"The most important features are the dashboard and reporting. The dashboard provides statistics with graphs and bar charts for our management."
"I found the dashboard features very useful. It made it easy to track remediation progress. I could publish dashboards to remediation teams and track the progress on the dashboards."
"The tool provides us insight into the happens of the network and its hosts. It provides me with a list of hosts."
"The scans are the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"I find Tenable SC to be a very scalable product."
"The most valuable feature of the product is the Assurance Report Card, which gives us an overview of the security poster in just a simple glance."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The price could be improved."
"Maybe scalability. I know that the Pentera right now is high level in order to scan big deals over 500 IPs and not less, and not less. That can be more granular. This will be useful."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
"Support could be faster."
"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."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and 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."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
"The solution should provide better web application features and support."
"The solution's user interface has some issues."
"The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator."
Pentera is ranked 15th in Vulnerability Management with 5 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Pentera is rated 8.2, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Pentera writes "A stable solution that can be used to do continuous and automated vulnerability assessments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Pentera is most compared with Cymulate, Tenable Nessus, Picus Security, Horizon3.ai and Qualys VMDR, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai. See our Pentera vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all 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.
