We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tanium based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management."The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pros →
"Tanium's most valuable features are patch management, inventory, and distribution software."
"I like the fact that you can create patching campaigns depending on the area of your network that you want to address first. I like the ability it has to make several campaigns that work in parallel."
"The product is granular and can build complex roles compared to other EDR vendors."
"The interrogation piece was the most valuable feature because it was very detailed."
"For incident response tasks, all these tasks can get done in minutes with minimal disruption to the end-user."
"I'm not so familiar with the tool but I like the interaction of the console to the picture. Patching is the primary model I have been focusing on for the last couple of weeks. So I have created a proof of concept environment and have been checking the available features."
"The security features are very valuable."
"Threat hunting is a very good feature on Tanium. We have just started using it and have not used it extensively."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"I would like to have more integrations and custom plugins to input. Integration is always a big deal in a lot of different environments."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The solution lacks mobility."
"The performance could improve in future releases. We have had performance issues in specialized web environments, but overall I think the problems are less than 2% of the computer systems being used."
"Tanium's limitations should be improved because although it is a great tool, it is limited to only a few classes during a session."
"The main issues are the network connection because different customers have issues with their networks. It's difficult implementing this type of solution because the network is the main feature in the architecture for these types of solutions. Tanium could improve by creating some network optimization."
"Most of the time, agent-relative issues have to be more equipped with self-healing features. At times, the agent is there, but for some reason, it doesn't report a status. It gives certain problems that are obviously agent-based."
"It is not really additional functions, or the features that are needed, rather the complexity would be reduced based on the number of modules required to put together a comprehensive operational security and risk compliance model."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 11th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while Tanium is ranked 36th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 15 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Tanium is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) writes "Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tanium writes "Useful tool for vulnerability management and deploying applications, needing improvement in its OS upgrade". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM and Cisco SecureX, whereas Tanium is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Qualys VMDR and ServiceNow Discovery.
We monitor all Risk-Based 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.
