We performed a comparison between Pentera and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The product is easy to use."
"What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."
"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
"We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data."
"The solution is one of the most, if not the most, stable product available."
"The solution is completely stable and operation is user-friendly."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."
"Initial setup was pretty straightforward."
"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."
"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."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The price could be improved."
"Maybe scalability. I know that the Pentera right now is high level in order to scan big deals over 500 IPs and not less, and not less. That can be more granular. This will be useful."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"Tenable SC can improve by adding more integrations with HCI-type tools and more accurate vulnerability detection."
"Tenable's reporting engine needs improvement. It needs to be more efficient and add more features."
"The solution needs to improve its support. I would like to see a bird's eye view of my network architecture. I would also like to see the continuous view feature in the tool."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
"The solution should include compliance-based scanning."
"The product could be user-friendly, and they could enhance the web application's security features."
"The GUI could be improved to have all concerns and priorities use the same GUI, allowing them to see all tickets, assign vulnerabilities, and assign variation failures to each member of their team."
"Current web page needs improvement, slows down processes."
Pentera is ranked 12th in Vulnerability Management with 5 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Pentera is rated 8.2, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Pentera writes "A stable solution that can be used to do continuous and automated vulnerability assessments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Pentera is most compared with Cymulate, Tenable Nessus, Picus Security, Horizon3.ai and Qualys VMDR, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Nessus and Horizon3.ai. See our Pentera 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.