We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management 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 excels in detecting vulnerabilities with its advanced scanning and prioritization features. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, on the other hand, offers a wide range of data security features such as governance and administration portal panel. Tenable.sc has room for improvement in various areas such as penetration testing, pricing, reporting, GUI, and support. On the other hand, Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management needs better reporting, investigation, customization, and integration.
Service and Support: Tenable.sc has received positive feedback for their customer service, although there have been reports of delayed responses. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management has received mixed reviews, with some customers satisfied with their support while others feel it could be better.
Ease of Deployment: Tenable.sc's setup is easy and straightforward, while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's setup may require vendor support or multiple administrators. Tenable.sc's on-prem version involves significant integration, while CloudGuard's difficulty may depend on the connection to cloud systems.
Pricing: Tenable.sc charges based on the number of IP addresses scanned, while Check Point bases it on the size of the cloud infrastructure. Check Point's setup cost is generally seen as affordable and easy, while opinions on Tenable.sc's pricing vary.
ROI: Tenable.sc saves on manpower and has a positive ROI while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is more expensive but provides security and compliance solutions that can lead to a 35% ROI growth rate.
Comparison Results: Tenable.sc is the favored option when compared to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management according to user feedback. Tenable.sc has more advanced scanning capabilities, vulnerability ratings, and a risk-based approach compared to its competitor. While Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management offers valuable features such as data security and automated remediation, users have suggested that it needs improvement in areas such as reporting options, false positives, and pricing.
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"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 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."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"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."
"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 solution is very user-friendly."
"The reporting is quite good. It is the most powerful aspect of this solution."
"The most valuable feature is the CloudBots for auto-remediation of security findings."
"The ability to integrate it with Microsoft Azure Sentinel allows us to validate the logs in an even more complex and meaningful way."
"The administration portal panel is very intuitive."
"The posture management and remediation features are the most valuable. We use GSL Builder to build custom rules in alignment with our organization's policies. CloudGuard has canned rules using multiple standard frameworks, but we also have additional rules."
"Alerts of cloud activity happening across all accounts is helpful."
"This solution has saved the company from unnecessary data loss that occurs due to cyber attacks."
"The comprehensive security for IaaS and PaaS cloud assets provides efficient security awareness to all the teams."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are the reports and the dashboards."
"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 scanning part, the agent part – that's the valuable aspect."
"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."
"Compliance and vulnerability scans are most valuable. Compliance scan helps in validating how our teams are complying, and vulnerability scan helps in future-proofing. Its vulnerability detection is accurate."
"The most valuable features in Tenable SC are scanning and analysis."
"The most important features are the dashboard and reporting. The dashboard provides statistics with graphs and bar charts for our management."
"This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products."
"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."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"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."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"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."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"Currently, I would like this solution extended to cellular devices or tablets."
"CloudGuard could be more customizable. It has built-in standards for things like GDPR compliance. But depending on your business lane, you might want to build your own controls based on your own standards."
"The rules are not well-tuned, and many of them generate false positives or nonsensical results."
"I’d like to see more integration with third-party tools. For example, it would be helpful to have an integration between Dome9 and ServiceNow to manage security incidents and security changes."
"The costs are really high if you want the entire capabilities of the platform."
"Down the road, we would like to see automation. That is probably a feature that most people want. If they can automate patching a vulnerability, it will be much easier."
"Streamlining the user interface would greatly improve the user experience."
"The guidelines to implement or to link with the clouds are not complete."
"Tenable SC could improve by making the creation of the initial reports easier that correspond to our network."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."
"It's good at creating information, it's good creating dashboards, it's good at creating reports, but if you want to take that reporting metadata and put it into another tool, that is a little bit lacking."
"The integration is very good, although it still needs to improve."
"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."
"I will say it's a lot slower compared to an MS scan. It takes so much longer, so the performance could definitely be worked on."
"There's a lot of information being streamed out of the reports. What would be nice, and maybe we just haven't found it, would be more of an executive-type view. We still expect it to collect all this information, but we would like a feature that would allow us to show it to an executive or a director or someone like that and give them some type of high-level overview but not get into the nitty-gritty."
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Vulnerability Management with 60 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR and Fortinet FortiWeb, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Forescout Platform. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.
