Compare Aruba ClearPass vs. Tenable SecurityCenter

Aruba ClearPass is ranked 2nd in Network Access Control with 8 reviews while Tenable SecurityCenter is ranked 4th in Vulnerability Management with 7 reviews. Aruba ClearPass is rated 9.2, while Tenable SecurityCenter is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Aruba ClearPass writes "Enables us to double verify whether a machine is compliant with our policy ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable SecurityCenter writes "Enables very customized policies to routinely scan, while simultaneously not causing impact". Aruba ClearPass is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), ForeScout CounterACT and FortiNAC, whereas Tenable SecurityCenter is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VM and ForeScout CounterACT.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Aruba Networks, ForeScout and others in Network Access Control. Updated: October 2019.
378,397 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
We can double verify whether a machine is compliant with our policy on the one hand, and on the other hand if it's one of our machines we let it into the network.Aruba has improved my organization because it supported me on my level of access.The initial setup was straightforward.Aruba ClearPass has improved the security control in our network environment.We are able to satisfy many different organizational needs because of its flexibility.It eliminated the management of 10 different individual discrete RADIUS servers.Its clustering model saved us staff time and reduced errors by eliminating the need to manage individual RADIUS servers.It has an easy to learn web GUI and ​command lines.​

Read more »

This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products.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.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.I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network.We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data.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.Initial setup was pretty straightforward.It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability.

Read more »

Cons
The user interface should be improved. The logs and how the logging mechanism works can also use an upgrade.Aruba needs to improve and the processes must be clear.I would like the area of managing wired technology to be improved. Wireless is very good but I'm still struggling a bit to do my end to end configurations in the wired technology area.Configuration should be more easy to understand between the link of two topics.The product's graphical user interface (GUI) could use an update and better integration between the guest management and policy management interfaces.​​The AirWave Dashboard heat maps could be better designed.Instructions on adding layouts are not as clear as they could be.​I would like to see is “AAS”. Not only Aruba APs with central, but NAC/ClearPass, AirWave, and everything licensed as a Service. This way, like AWS, they can spin up what they need when they need it and vice versa.

Read more »

The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator.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.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 web application scanning area can be improved.A good plugin editor would be a good additional option for the Security Center.In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve.At times we have had the typical bugs.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
We pay an annual licensing fee for Aruba and there are no additional costs.​Cost is important. I switched because Aruba's costs were well below Cisco's.Licensing and pricing are extremely straightforward.Run a 90 day free Proof of Concept (POC) for each product by implementing and using it fully in your environment. This way you will be educated on its features, functionality, and manageability.​

Read more »

Costing is pretty reasonable compared to the competition.The pricing is more than Nexpose.The licensing costs for this solution are approximately $100,000 US, and I think that covers everything.We're able to save because we don't have to employ more staff members to help wit ht he scheduling of the scans, running the reports or sending them out to the systems owners. That alone is a big ROI for us.It is slightly more expensive than other solutions in the same sphere.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control solutions are best for your needs.
378,397 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
Views
19,488
Comparisons
12,623
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
332
Avg. Rating
9.3
4th
Views
5,120
Comparisons
3,128
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
987
Avg. Rating
7.7
Top Comparisons
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Also Known As
Avenda eTIPSTenable Unified Security
Learn
Aruba Networks
Tenable Network Security
Overview

ClearPass Policy Manager provides secure network access in a world made up of mobile and IoT devices. It features ultra-scalable AAA with RADIUS and uses contextual data based on every user and device to enforce adaptive policies for wireless, wired or VPN access. 

SecurityCenter consolidates and evaluates vulnerability data across the enterprise, prioritizing security risks and providing a clear view of your security posture. With SecurityCenter, get the visibility and context you need to effectively prioritize and remediate vulnerabilities, ensure compliance with IT security frameworks, standards and regulations, and take decisive action to ensure the effectiveness of your IT security program and reduce business risk.

Offer
Learn more about Aruba ClearPass
Learn more about Tenable SecurityCenter
Sample Customers
Consulate Health Care, Los Angeles Unified School District, Science Applications International Corp (SAIC), San Diego State University, KFC, ACTS Retirement-Life CommunitiesIBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company23%
Manufacturing Company15%
University15%
Comms Service Provider15%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company20%
Comms Service Provider14%
Manufacturing Company10%
Energy/Utilities Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company33%
Comms Service Provider16%
Media Company7%
Financial Services Firm7%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Aruba Networks, ForeScout and others in Network Access Control. Updated: October 2019.
378,397 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Network Access Control 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.
Sign Up with Email