We performed a comparison between RSA Archer and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, AuditBoard, Trend Micro and others in GRC."The Advance Workflow feature simplifies things."
"The most valuable feature is the enterprise module, which provides the capability of having all of the information stored and linked with everything else."
"Solution is scalable."
"I like how Archer requires very little programming ability. A person with minimum coding experience can configure the necessary fields in Archer. It's more of a drag-and-drop solution."
"Even non-technical people can be masters of the product."
"The solution has improved my organization by having everything combined to a single platform."
"Makes auditing much more convenient."
"It has various valuable features. For example, showing us if a control aligns with specific standards or frameworks helps us understand it better and verify its compliance."
"The scans are the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"This product has the best results in terms of the lowest number of false-positives and false-negatives."
"The solution is one of the most, if not the most, stable product available."
"Tenable SC is good for reporting and alerting. The filtering feature is also very valuable. Its integration with multiple vendors is quite good. It can be integrated with SIEM solutions and PAM solutions such as Thycotic, which is very helpful."
"Feature-wise, Tenable Security Center is a very fast tool with many dashboards and reports, and it covers all our systems."
"We use Tenable to scan all of our environments and plugins for vulnerabilities. Tenable helps us discover network vulnerabilities to threats and piracy."
"The scanning part, the agent part – that's the valuable aspect."
"What is useful to me is being able to fulfill very customized scanning policies. In the clinical environment, because of vendor control, we can't perform credential-vulnerability scanning. And network scans, which I've done before, can cause a lot of impact. Being able to create very customized policies to be able to routinely scan and audit our clinical networks, while simultaneously not causing impact, is important to us."
"The design and advanced workflow need to be improved."
"It's resource-hungry, that's the best way of putting it."
"RSA Archer might be a bit expensive for small companies because it's a vast tool."
"There is no inbuilt alert in Archer to let us know that a data feed has failed or did not run for different reasons. So, we don't even get to know that a feed has not run until somebody reports it to us. This has been a problem all the time. Data feeds have always been a big headache for us because there is no feature to let us know if a feed has not run or has failed. If Archer had a feature to send us an email notification when a feed has failed, it would've been very helpful. This is the reason why our users are slowly moving away to another platform. Some of the modules that I have been managing are being moved to ServiceNow. Next year, a lot of our modules will be moved from RSA Archer to ServiceNow, and the data feed issue has been one of the main reasons."
"An area for improvement would be the user interface. They could also offer more on-demand applications free of cost."
"I would like to see real-time data, from vulnerabilities, and threats."
"There should be a way to export and get data from the system in PDF or PowerPoint presentation format. This would be a great addition."
"There are some issues with the interface for version 6.5 but these may already be repaired and simplified in the new versions that have been released."
"The reporting side can be improved. The dashboards are nice, but exporting things out for reports for management was a little tough."
"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."
"The solution should provide better web application features and support."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
"The product could be user-friendly, and they could enhance the web application's security features."
"Tenable SC can improve by making it easier to create complicated reports and have more effectiveness in the remediation area for comparison between the scans."
"Tenable SC could improve by making the creation of the initial reports easier that correspond to our network."
RSA Archer is ranked 1st in GRC with 38 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. RSA Archer is rated 8.0, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of RSA Archer writes "A rich application with good workflow, but search feature needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". RSA Archer is most compared with OneTrust GRC, IBM OpenPages, MetricStream, Workiva Wdesk and AuditBoard, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai.
We monitor all GRC 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.
Yes, take a look at DeepSurface. It’s designed to automate the process.
Clear use with the NIST compliance framework, Archer IRM 6.9.sp3.p2, use of pre-processing out of Archer and now integration with agnostic tools.
FOSS or premium brands - all depends on your supply chain risk.
Support for qualitative nice to get a bow-tie on when quantitative data works for you. Add your methods, AWARE, FAIR, COBIT, ATT&CK; all visuals.