Compare Plixer Scrutinizer vs. Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View
 |
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
"The most valuable features of the solution are the ability to track what a device is doing and to go back historically. It is also able to go down to, and identify, very low levels of traffic." "The ability to view the status of the top-10 at a glance is helpful. We immediately know which link is over-utilized or heavily used... and it's all in real-time." "It's agnostic as far as what your network gear is. As long as it supports an sFlow, JFlow, NetFlow, some kind of flow monitoring, Plixer will support it very well." "There are other tools out there that will do what Scrutinizer does. But what I have found with Scrutinizer is that it does it very quickly. I've taken 25 million individual data fragments from the different sensors, and it has graphed that and mapped it and presented a picture within 30 seconds. It has a very efficient database algorithm that I am really impressed with." "The reporting and generating troubleshooting reports would be the best feature; our host-to-host conversation reporting." "As a network engineer, the ability to identify what traffic on the link is consuming all the bandwidth at any given time, and provide immediate feedback to the business, is the most valuable feature." "We have had many requests to understand in the network which devices are connected to others. Most people don't have this information or are able to establish a map of data flow everywhere around the network. Scrutinizer can really help with this. We are using it to understand who is talking to what, how, and which protocols can help us to improve security and analyze flow." "The solution helps to enrich the data context of our network traffic. It allows me to see what applications are most in use on a slightly historical basis, going back a day or week at tops. It allows me to tune QoS or traffic shaping around what's being used. It saves me from having to unnecessarily upgrade, if I don't need to." | "The first of the valuable features is how easy it is to access all of the information that's gathered from the assessments... With a lot of other technologies, like Rapid7, if you're using Nexpose you effectively have to be a DBA to get some of the lower-level results from the scans. And Qualys wasn't very intuitive." "The next big one is supportability. In a large enterprise, we have many types of technologies. The technology we previously had didn't even support authentication to a lot of those technologies." "The scanning itself is really the core of the tool, and it's what we're most interested in." |
Cons | |
"The reporting structure, the front-end GUI, also needs some work. It needs some getting used to. It works fairly well, but it's a technical tool rather than a user tool. You have to understand the structure of the databases before you can really use it." "The solution creates a visual map of a particular location and how the network flows. You need to spend time to generate all those maps. If they could figure out a way to reduce the time needed to generate the maps, that would be great." "They're working on the security areas, so it can provide more insight. What they have is still pretty much IP-concentric. If they were to make it IP and URL, they'd be a little bit ahead on that." "Knowing that they're coming out with a new user interface, that is an area where there is room for improvement. There are so many variables. They should limit the variables in the user interface and create some classes, like "simple," "novice," and "expert" to narrow down the variables within it." "There is room for improvement around the data that they have on the website about solutions... they should have more templated solutions on their website. Going out and identifying how to do RTP performance with a Cisco router, or how to do application response times in an Arrista data center deployment was where most of the work was... They should spend some more time documenting solutions and putting together white papers." "For updating the Scrutinizer platform, when we have the actual data, it never happens in one day. Every time we have the data, we are obliged to install a new server in order to integrate the old data, and every time it has a problem. Most of the time, we were obliged to scrap all the data because we couldn't transfer it to the new server. So, it would be very good if they could improve this part." "The visual acuity of how it presents data can sometimes be confusing. It takes a bit for people to spin up how to look at the graphs." "It would be useful if there was a way to back up the configuration information. E.g., if you wanted to deploy a new instance or disaster recovery, you could quite easily deploy and restore the config, as opposed to having to restore all the NetFlow data. If there was just a button that said "backup config information", that would be good." | "When it comes to... dynamic application scanning, I think they are lagging behind the curve. They have a lackluster solution, to the point where I think they need to determine, as a company, whether or not that's a space they even want to play in." "There are certain circumstances where they may have found a vulnerable service and they just removed the service completely from the device because nobody was using it. There's no way to go into SecurityCenter and mark it, to say, "This is no longer an issue. It doesn't exist anymore." Or, "The risk was accepted for one year, so let's not report it as 'high' until that one year period is done." The handling of operational flow around vulnerability management could be improved." |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
"Compared to some of the other tools we have, it's incredibly reasonably priced." "Our entire solution, amortized over five years, is in the vicinity of $40,000 to $50,000 a year." "We pay our one-off cost for the licenses, per device, in blocks of 50. And then we pay an annual maintenance fee of about $15,000 Australian, which is, at this point in time, about $9,000 US, for those 250 devices. The upfront costs for the 250-license use, were about $50,000 Australian, which is about $32,000 US." "The license is per device. We have 50 devices." "We just renewed. The pricing is 5,000 euro per year. This is the final price. All tax (20 percent) is included." "We have increased the license over time. We have added more licenses as the network has grown." "There is a recurring maintenance fee after the initial purchase or if we want the license upgrade." "There are no extra costs. It's about $8,000 a year. The bang for the buck (cost) is definitely a plus." | "We did a three-year deal where the cost is amortized over the three years. The Elite Support was an additional cost to the standard licensing fees... If you use Security Center, most of the time it is on-premise, so you're going to have some sort of infrastructure to build out and there's going to be a cost associated with that." More Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View Pricing and Cost Advice » |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs. 456,249 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Ranking  | |
Views 3,504 Comparisons 1,687 Reviews 10 Average Words per Review 1,702 Rating 8.9 | Views 1,066 Comparisons 763 Reviews 2 Average Words per Review 2,280 Rating 8.0 |
Popular Comparisons | |
 Compared 21% of the time.  Compared 17% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time.  Compared 5% of the time. | Compared 17% of the time.  Compared 15% of the time.  Compared 13% of the time.  Compared 12% of the time.  Compared 12% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| SecurityCenter Continuous View, SecurityCenter CV | |
Learn | |
| Plixer | Tenable Network Security |
Overview | |
The Scrutinizer incident response system leverages network traffic analytics to provide active monitoring, visualization, and reporting of network and security incidents. The system quickly delivers the rich forensic data needed by IT professionals to support fast and efficient incident response. | SecurityCenter Continuous View is the market-leading continuous network monitoring platform. It integrates SecurityCenter along with multiple Nessus Network Monitor sensors and Log Correlation Engine (LCE) to provide comprehensive continuous network monitoring. |
Offer | |
Learn more about Plixer Scrutinizer | Learn more about Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View |
Sample Customers | |
| Oxford Networks, Squaw Valley Ski Holdings, UltiSat, Wipro, West Aurora School District 129, SUNY Geneseo College, Bloomington Public Schools, First National Bank of Pennsylvania, Kitsap Credit Union, Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County Houston Texas, Carilion Clinic, Banner Health, IDEXX Laboratories, Phibro Animal Health Corporation, Goodwill Industries, Parmalat, Armstrong Coal Company, Flybe, James Walker | Methodist Healthcare Ministries |
Top Industries | |
Financial Services Firm29% Government14% Insurance Company14% Energy/Utilities Company14% Computer Software Company34% Comms Service Provider13% Government9% Financial Services Firm7% | Comms Service Provider30% Computer Software Company19% Government14% Media Company6% |
Company Size | |
Small Business10% Midsize Enterprise10% Large Enterprise80% | No Data Available |
Find out what your peers are saying about Plixer Scrutinizer vs. Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
456,249 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Plixer Scrutinizer is ranked 7th in Network Monitoring Software with 10 reviews while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View is ranked 35th in Network Monitoring Software with 2 reviews. Plixer Scrutinizer is rated 9.0, while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Plixer Scrutinizer writes "Advanced reporting runs analytics on NetFlow and provides signature-based recognition of problems in the network environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View writes "Provides the best network-based vulnerability scanning, but the dynamic scanning is lackluster". Plixer Scrutinizer is most compared with Cisco Stealthwatch, SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer, PRTG Network Monitor, Flowmon Solution and Darktrace, whereas Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View is most compared with Cisco Stealthwatch, ManageEngine OpManager, SCOM, Fortinet FortiSIEM and LogRhythm NetMon. See our Plixer Scrutinizer vs. Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.