Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Prevasio 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

Prevasio
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
41st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (11th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (29th)
Tenable Security Center
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) category, the mindshare of Prevasio is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Security Center is 1.9%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Juan Tolosa - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation helps reduce human error, and platform suggests the best configuration to apply
The optimizations are the most useful aspect because most customers have a very unmanaged network with a lot of rules. We use a lot of the optimizations in our reports for improving firewall rules. It also provides our clients with full visibility into the risks involved in firewall change requests and that is very important because our clients are often banks that must be in compliance with PCI. And when it comes to preparing for audits and ensuring that firewalls are in compliance, the solution is very useful. We are able to do it very fast. We can do a lot of iterations and get better policy rules all the time. Although not many of our clients are migrating to the cloud, for those that are, AlgoSec is useful. The part of the process that takes a long time is the human part. We must have gap committees and approvals that take a long time. But the integration itself is very easy with AlgoSec. We have all the information in our hands about the traffic we must enable on the cloud and for making new rules. All that is automated.
OndrejKOVAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Empower clients with risk-based vulnerability management through continuous workflow and valuable insights
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages. Additionally, the licensing model could be more flexible for managed security providers, similar to a pay-as-you-go model.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The firewall policy summarization is the most valuable feature. It helps us to cross-check the firewall ruleset. That's the main purpose of it. And of course, it monitors changes of the firewall policy. It provides full visibility into the risk involved in firewall change requests. It helps us to check for any integrity issues and conflicts with other rulesets, and of course the compliance."
"Because we get about 60 to 70 rules to deploy a week during the firewall maintenance window, we might create some duplicate rules or open duplicate ports. AlgoSec has become very helpful whenever we need to find out the nodes or subnets that have already been created, then we don't need to create the duplicate subnet of that particular IP address."
"We have used the solution to implement and manage microsegmentation initiatives. That is the whole point of modeling towards, "Hey, how will this work for a specific situation in the end?" I think it's a great solution because a lot of companies are not just going to the cloud, but microsegmentation and service-delivered products. So, I feel like it is very capable and comparatively better than its peers, if not equal."
"The optimizations are the most useful aspect because most customers have a very unmanaged network with a lot of rules. We use a lot of the optimizations in our reports for improving firewall rules."
"AlgoSec has good tools to manage policies and devices. Many administrators like how it helps you monitor and clean up the policy for the on-premise firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the automation that can be accomplished by using scripts. If we didn't have AlgoSec, I would have to do everything manually."
"AlgoBot is a Slack chatbot that they've designed to help people identify if the firewalls are going to allow or block specific network traffic. We leveraged this to allow our staff to check themselves if the firewalls are going to be blocking traffic or not. That saves us logging into the firewalls and running the query off the host. We give them the power to use it and it saves us time."
"We have Check Point, Palo Alto, and FortiGate firewalls, and it integrates pretty seamlessly with these firewalls. We have had no issues so far."
"The most valuable feature is the automatic and periodic management of security scans, along with the ability to consolidate all information into a single dashboard."
"The tool provides us insight into the happens of the network and its hosts. It provides me with a list of hosts."
"The product is our second solution, and we are happy that it meets our requirements."
"The solution has a lean and easy-to-use interface that is not confusing to first-time users."
"The most valuable features in Tenable SC are scanning and analysis."
"This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products."
"My advice for those considering Tenable Security Center is to note the benefit of upgrading vulnerable devices."
"This product has the best results in terms of the lowest number of false-positives and false-negatives."
 

Cons

"The technical support response time is low. This might be due to the coronavirus pandemic situation, but I am not getting full support when working with them."
"There is a little bit of scope for improvement in the risk profiles that come with the AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer module. Currently, AlgoSec provides only three standard zones within a risk profile. These standard zones are external, internal, and DMZ. Everybody's network is divided into different zones within a data center, but AlgoSec only provides three zones. This is a limitation that I see for the risk profile analysis. If there was an option to customize these zones, it would be great."
"The analysis part can be improved when I make a flow request. There should be a clear analysis of which metric part needs to be opened and which firewalls will be opened. It should give you a bit more graphical visibility about these."
"We work with multiple security vendors. It's rather difficult to integrate the vendors. AlgoSec is a platform that hasn't really been developed as much as we would like to just because of its complexity to set up. If it was easy to set up and easy to get integrations with other companies, then we would be doing it. But the thought is that we are relatively stretched thin in our team as it is and the complexity of configuring AlgoSec doesn't make it any easier."
"When we send multiple requests across at once, sometimes it causes errors and FireFlow gets stuck. In cases like this, we have to go back in and fix it."
"Integration with Oracle on the cloud is not supported. I would also like to see integrations with network devices in Layer 2."
"AlgoSec cannot be integrated with solutions that require two-step or multi-factor authentication. Embedding multi-factor authentication capability into the solution would be a valuable feature."
"In the new version H32, there are many, many bugs."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve the vulnerability assessment because we have experienced some challenges with accuracy."
"At times we have had the typical bugs."
"We would like to see the inclusion of external IPs and simplified reporting that's easier to deal with"
"Tenable's technical support has declined in quality over time. While they used to be excellent, achieving ratings of eight or nine, they now rate around six or seven due to longer response times and less thorough assistance."
"The product could be user-friendly, and they could enhance the web application's security features."
"For downloading reports, we have to go to the scan and then we have to go to the reports and download the Excel or CSV or PDF. I think these menus and clicks can be minimized."
"It could be more user-friendly for creating custom reports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I heard that the licensing was around $100,000 a year."
"For the South American market, the prices are very high."
"We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."
"Though reasonable, the main competitor of Tenable SC, Rapid7, offers a more aggressive and better priced product."
"The pricing depends upon the number of IPs."
"We're happy with the licensing cost and find it affordable."
"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"
"For 500 users the licensing fee is roughly $100,000."
"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."
"Tenable.sc is more expensive than its competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Tenable SC?
The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center is quite expensive, particularly for the CEE region, causing us to lose cases due to its pricing. The licensing requirements can be prohibitive for managed security service ...
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where client...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Prevasio vs. Tenable Security Center and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.