We performed a comparison between Tenable.sc and Tanium based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison results: Based on the parameters we compared, Tenable.sc comes out ahead of Tanium. While both solutions provide valuable insight into their systems, Tanium’s abundance of false positives and its lacking technical support leave room for improvement.
"The solution is scalable and helps to understand how infrastructure works. It helps to improve the health of the organization."
"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."
"I like the tool's incident response and security patching."
"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."
"I would say Tanium is the best tool for vulnerability management."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the consolidation of all historical data on device endpoints, security drivers, firmware, and Software version gaps."
"Tenable SC is good for reporting and alerting. The filtering feature is also very valuable. Its integration with multiple vendors is quite good. It can be integrated with SIEM solutions and PAM solutions such as Thycotic, which is very helpful."
"We use Tenable to scan all of our environments and plugins for vulnerabilities. Tenable helps us discover network vulnerabilities to threats and piracy."
"Tenable SC's most valuable features are the low number of false positives and the strong capability of providing prioritization for the vulnerabilities detected."
"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."
"The scans are the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability."
"The solution is one of the most, if not the most, stable product available."
"The most valuable feature of the product is the Assurance Report Card, which gives us an overview of the security poster in just a simple glance."
"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."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The solution lacks mobility."
"The most painful thing is the interface. It's a bit unclear sometimes."
"Any movement into a SaaS solution has challenges since the processes and data flows are not well defined. Hence, you need to build it at the same time."
"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."
"I would like to have more integrations and custom plugins to input. Integration is always a big deal in a lot of different environments."
"Tanium's limitations should be improved because although it is a great tool, it is limited to only a few classes during a session."
"If I want to have a very low-managed scan policy, it's a lot of work to create something which is very basic. If I use a tool like Nmap, all I have to do is download it, install it, type in the command, and it's good to go. In Security Center, I have to go through a lot of work to create a policy that's very basic."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"The web application is not very functional."
"The pricing is reasonable, but this could be brought down more aggressively, such as we see with Rapid7, Tenable SC's main competitor."
"We are facing some challenges related to our channel."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"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."
Tanium is ranked 18th in Vulnerability Management with 15 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Tanium is rated 7.4, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Tanium writes "Useful tool for vulnerability management and deploying applications, needing improvement in its OS upgrade". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Tanium is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Qualys VMDR and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Wiz. See our Tanium vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management 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.
