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.
"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."
"Tanium’s linear-chain architecture is valuable."
"Tanium has made the process of detecting threats more proactive with its detection. So, the process is easier and more efficient."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the consolidation of all historical data on device endpoints, security drivers, firmware, and Software version gaps."
"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 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."
"Threat hunting is a very good feature on Tanium. We have just started using it and have not used it extensively."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"What is useful to me is being able to fulfill very customized scanning policies. In the clinical environment, because of vendor control, we can't perform credential-vulnerability scanning. And network scans, which I've done before, can cause a lot of impact. Being able to create very customized policies to be able to routinely scan and audit our clinical networks, while simultaneously not causing impact, is important to us."
"Feature-wise, Tenable Security Center is a very fast tool with many dashboards and reports, and it covers all our systems."
"This product has the best results in terms of the lowest number of false-positives and false-negatives."
"The solution has a lean and easy-to-use interface that is not confusing to first-time users."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are scanning, reporting, dashboards, and automation."
"The scans are the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"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."
"I would like to have more integrations and custom plugins to input. Integration is always a big deal in a lot of different environments."
"They could improve the UI."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve the reporting and tracking capabilities."
"The solution can give a lot of false positives."
"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."
"The product should provide risk-based vulnerability management."
"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."
"The user interface can be improved."
"For downloading reports, we have to go to the scan and then we have to go to the reports and download the Excel or CSV or PDF. I think these menus and clicks can be minimized."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
"Security can always be improved."
"The solution needs to improve the vulnerability assessment because we have experienced some challenges with accuracy."
"Deploying Tenable.sc is highly complex because it's an on-prem solution, whereas Tenable.io is cloud-based, so you can go live as soon as you log in. Tenable.sc involves significant integration with other on-prem solutions, and the deployment takes about two to three weeks with the help of a system integrator"
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 BigFix, 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.