We performed a comparison between Tenable Security Center and XM Cyber based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"The vulnerability management modules and the discovery and inventory are the most valuable features. Before using Wiz, it was a very manual process for both. After implementing it, we're able to get all of the analytics into a single platform that gives us visibility across all the systems in our cloud. We're able to correspond and understand what the vulnerability landscape looks like a lot faster."
"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."
"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 solution is very user-friendly."
"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."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"I like Tenable.sc's analytics and reporting. You can also configure your on-prem network monitors to talk to your Tenable.sc control panel."
"The most important features are the dashboard and reporting. The dashboard provides statistics with graphs and bar charts for our management."
"It is a very good and user-friendly product."
"The feature we've liked most recently was being able to take the YARA rules from FireEye and put them into Tenable's scan for the most recent SolarWinds exploit. That was really useful."
"One of the most valuable features is their distributed scan model for allotting engines to work together as a pool and handle multiple scans at once, across multiple environments. Automatic scanning distribution is a distinguishing feature of their toolset."
"The solution is very intuitive and the dashboards are simple to use."
"I find Tenable SC to be a very scalable product."
"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 I personally like very much, from my experience, is that it is very reliable."
"The platform's most valuable feature is attack simulation."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"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."
"We would like to see improvements to executive-level reporting and data reporting in general, which we understand is being rolled out to the platform."
"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 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."
"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."
"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."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
"The solution is expensive."
"Additional costs are associated with using the solution, as additional scanners are required for different endpoints connected to the Tenable Security Center. If Tenable Security Center could extract information from these scanners automatically rather than manually, it would enhance user-friendliness for customers."
"The reporting side can be improved. The dashboards are nice, but exporting things out for reports for management was a little tough."
"The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time."
"The solution should include compliance-based scanning."
"The solution should provide better web application features and support."
"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."
"We'd like to see a cheaper price."
"XM Cyber could identify all areas of vulnerability. They could expand the identification span for different areas."
Tenable Security Center is ranked 10th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 48 reviews while XM Cyber is ranked 26th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 2 reviews. Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2, while XM Cyber is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". On the other hand, the top reviewer of XM Cyber writes "Reliable with no false-positives and helpful support". Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM), whereas XM Cyber is most compared with Pentera, Cymulate, SafeBreach, Picus Security and Qualys VMDR. See our Tenable Security Center vs. XM Cyber report.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors and best Vulnerability Management 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.