We performed a comparison between AWS Security Hub and Tenable.sc based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Tenable.sc provides precise identification of vulnerabilities, compliance and vulnerability scans, and a risk-oriented methodology. On the other hand, AWS Security Hub receives commendation for its integration capabilities, immediate alerts, and thorough notifications regarding potential compliance concerns. Tenable.sc and AWS Security Hub both have areas where they could improve. Tenable.sc needs to work on their penetration testing, pricing, ticketing, GUI, reporting, vendor training, and accuracy of vulnerability assessments. AWS Security Hub requires more integration options, better UI, multi-cloud compatibility, faster updates, and easier configuration.
Service and Support: Tenable.sc's customer service has received mixed feedback, with varying levels of helpfulness. In comparison, AWS Security Hub's support is praised for being prompt and good.
Ease of Deployment: Tenable.sc's initial setup is praised for being simple and quick, with the cloud version taking only one day and the on-prem version taking two to three weeks. Meanwhile, AWS Security Hub's setup is also considered easy, though it does involve policy configuration and some upkeep.
Pricing: Tenable.sc charges based on the number of IP addresses and has mixed opinions on pricing, while AWS Security Hub has reasonable pricing.
ROI: Tenable.sc is cost-effective and offers a guaranteed ROI with a significant reduction in manpower costs. In contrast, AWS Security Hub does not provide the same level of value, despite offering a positive outcome.
Comparison Results: Tenable.sc is seen as the superior choice when compared to AWS Security Hub by users. This is due to its extensive features, including accurate vulnerability detection, compliance and vulnerability scans, and a risk-based approach. Tenable.sc also provides advanced scanning, asset discovery, and scoring, which are not found in AWS Security Hub. Although AWS Security Hub is praised for its integration capabilities and real-time alerts, Tenable.sc's analysis, prioritization, and usability features make it a more valuable tool for vulnerability analysis and remediation progress tracking.
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"Out of all the features, the one item that has been most valuable is the fact that Wiz puts into context all the pieces that create an issue, and applies a particular risk evaluation that helps us prioritize when we need to address a misconfiguration, vulnerability, or any issue that would put our environment into risk."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"Currently, our organization utilizes AWS for various purposes, including SaaS (Software as a Service), PaaS (Platform as a Service), and hosting applications in the cloud. We develop our applications and use AWS services as a platform for basic functions and secondary development needs. Additionally, we rely on PaaS for accounting services. Approximately, 50% of our applications are hosted in the cloud environment, making it a significant part of our current setup."
"The best feature of AWS Security Hub is that you can get compliance or your cloud's current security posture."
"The solution shows us our compliance score."
"The most valuable feature of AWS Security Hub is the ability to track when monitoring is not enabled on any of my resources."
"I really like the seamless integration with the AWS account structure. It can even be made mandatory as part of the landing zone. These are great features. And there's a single pane of glass for the entire account."
"The platform has valuable features for security."
"Cloudposse is a valuable feature as it guarantees my security."
"Easily integrates with third-party tools"
"Their overall cost of service is pretty good."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"The tool gives us fewer false positives. Compared to its competitors, the solution’s reports are more accurate."
"We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are scanning, reporting, dashboards, and automation."
"We use Tenable to scan all of our environments and plugins for vulnerabilities. Tenable helps us discover network vulnerabilities to threats and piracy."
"Compared to other products, the most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and ability to provide visibility over scan results while providing many templates to users, making it a helpful tool."
"The scans are the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"We're looking at some of the data compliance stuff that they've got Jon offer. I know they're looking at container security, which we gonna be looking at next."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"The reporting isn't that great. They have executive summaries, but it's only a compliance report that maps all current issues to specific controls. Whether you look at one subscription or project, regardless of the size, you will get a multipage report on how the issues in that account map to that control. Our CSO isn't going to read through that. He won't filter that out or show that to his leadership and say, "Here's what we're doing." It isn't a helpful report. They're working on it, but it's a poor executive summary."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"The only small pain point has been around some of the logging integrations. Some of the complexities of the script integrations aren't supported with some of the more automated infrastructure components. So, it's not as universal. For example, they have great support for cloud formation and other services, but if you're using another type of management utility or governance language for your infrastructure-as-code automation components, it becomes a little bit trickier to navigate that."
"We wish there were a way, beyond providing visibility and automated remediation, to wait on a given remediation, due to a critical aspect, such as the cost associated with a particular upgrade... We would like to see preventive controls that can be applied through Wiz to protect against vulnerabilities that we're not going to be able to remediate immediately."
"Given the level of visibility into all the cloud environments Wiz provides, it would be nice if they could integrate some kind of mechanism to better manage tenants on multiple platforms. For example, let's say that some servers don't have an application they need, such as an antivirus. Wiz could include an API or something to push those applications out to the servers. It would be great if you could remedy these issues directly from the Wiz platform."
"The telemetry doesn't always go into the control center. When you have multiple instances running in AWS, you need a control tower to take feeds from Security Hub and analyze your results. Sometimes exemptions aren't passed between the control tower and Security Hub. The configuration gets mixed up or you don't get the desired results."
"The support must be quicker."
"AWS Security Hub's configuration and integration are areas where it lacks and needs to improve."
"Although AWS Security Hub does a periodic scan of your overall infrastructure, it doesn't do it in real time."
"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."
"Adding SIEM features would be beneficial because of the limited customization of AWS Security Hub."
"One aspect that could be improved in the solution is its adaptability to different markets and geopolitical restrictions. In certain regions like Thailand, specific services from certain countries or providers, such as AWS or Azure, might be limited or blocked. It also needs improvement in would require configuring the solution more adaptable to AWS infrastructure and function."
"Security needs to be measured based on their own criteria. We can't add custom criteria specific to our organization. For example, having an S3 bucket publicly available might be flagged as a critical alert, but it might not be critical in a sandbox environment. So, it gets flagged as critical, which becomes a false positive. So, customization options and creating custom dashboards would be areas for improvement."
"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."
"Current web page needs improvement, slows down processes."
"The tool's initial configuration is not so easy."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution needs to improve the vulnerability assessment because we have experienced some challenges with accuracy."
"The reporting side can be improved. The dashboards are nice, but exporting things out for reports for management was a little tough."
"The web application is not very functional."
"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."
AWS Security Hub is ranked 13th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 17 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 10th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 48 reviews. AWS Security Hub is rated 7.6, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AWS Security Hub writes "A centralized dashboard that enables efficient monitoring and management of possible security issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". AWS Security Hub is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Google Chronicle Suite and Wazuh, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our AWS Security Hub vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) 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.