We performed a comparison between Tenable.io Container Security and Uptycs based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."With PingSafe, it's easy to onboard new accounts."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"The offensive security where they do a fix is valuable. They go to a misconfiguration and provide detailed alerts on what could be there. They also provide a remediation feature where if we give the permission, they can also go and fix the issue."
"We like the platform and its response time. We also like that its console is user-friendly as well as modern and sleek."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"They have multiple great features."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"I want PingSafe to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, PingSafe is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If PingSafe had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"The stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
"We end up facing a lot of issues after upgrades."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 21st in Container Security with 7 reviews while Uptycs is ranked 27th in Container Security with 1 review. Tenable.io Container Security is rated 7.8, while Uptycs is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Uptycs writes "Great features, good support, and lots of functionality". Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Trivy and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, whereas Uptycs is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Orca Security and Lacework.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.