RedRok vs Tenable Vulnerability Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

RedRok
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
80th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Cybersecurity Skills Training Platforms (18th)
Tenable Vulnerability Manag...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

SC
May 29, 2023
Though it is scalable and has an easy setup phase in place, the solution is an expensive one
I would like the solution to cover the whole cycle of mitigation since it's an area where the solution currently lacks. Nessus was created and, like, covered afterward. All the system is built around a basic unit that is mitigation, not the vulnerabilities. You don't have all the vulnerabilities where you build all the processes and all the reports that you have around it. Vulnerability is not like you have this problem. They say to you. Basically, you have a problem, but you don't have the patch. And the patch, inside of it, you have fifteen vulnerabilities, and it appears as a vulnerability. You are missing a patch, but it's not a vulnerability. All the system is built around missing mitigation. As a basic unit that everything is built around, and so this part is what you see when you do reports or when you build dashboards, and you have several databases inside that you can build reports around, but it's all beautiful, and you have a lot of reports, right, out of the box. But when you start creating something that you really need, like a new report, then you're, like, this data is in this database or downloaded database and this in another database of mitigations, and hence they cannot easily be connected, so each report can be all around this database because they have, like, two, three databases. I don't remember exactly, but they have separate databases inside, and you need to build the reports around one database, and it's not easy to connect two databases into one meaningful report. So, this is a hard part. In short, I would like to see the databases seamlessly connected while doing a report. The tool is okay, but, like I said, to cover the whole cycle and is like connecting the unconnectable things because they are built this way which I don't think they can change right now. They can add things like brand reputation monitoring because it's the system that needs to identify all the vulnerabilities and infrastructure vulnerabilities. They can take it to add code vulnerabilities, like, if it's an R&D company that creates software, they have vulnerabilities of other types, like application-level vulnerabilities in the things that they are developing. And if it's a cloud, then it needs to be covered in a good way, considering the cloud infrastructure. Also, it works on the IP level. On the cloud, you can do it around EC2 instances. You can do the same in Tenable.io but then all the part of the cloud layer that is cloud-based but not on the EC2 level. Let's say it's CloudWatch logs and all the con configurations that are at a cloud provider level. So, there can be vulnerabilities there not at the EC2 level of the machine itself. So these are also vulnerabilities, and it can be good if they are shown and covered by the system. In general, brand reputation and external CTI are needed in the solution. Somewhere outside in the open world that it was bridged, and it's there, and then maybe we can show it to you also that it was bridged. So it's now in the open world, and they don't want to be, you know, to be the open world and also on the external attack surface, but I think we saw that some module that they are doing that is in just the right direction. So, it's a good direction.

Quotes from Members

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There are additional features that can be licensed for an additional cost."
"A yearly payment has to be made toward the solution's licensing costs."
"Yearly payments are to be made toward the licensing cost of the product. It is neither a cheap nor an expensive product."
"The solution is not too expensive."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high price, I rate the pricing an eight. So, it is a pretty expensive solution."
"The product costs us around $137,000 annually for 4000 to 5000 assets."
"I would rate the pricing a five out of ten. It is in the middle."
"Compared to other VM solutions, Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
792,483 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Educational Organization
26%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What's the difference between Tenable Nessus and Tenable.io Vulnerability Management?
Tenable Nessus is a vulnerability assessment solution that is both easy to deploy and easy to manage. The design of the program is such that if a company should desire to handle the installation t...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tenable.io
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Global Payments AU/NZ
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Wiz, SentinelOne and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: July 2024.
792,483 professionals have used our research since 2012.