We performed a comparison between Portnox CORE and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, HPE Aruba Networking, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC)."It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"Previous to the deployment we didn't have complete visibility of all the endpoints, all the devices that are connected to the network. But with the deployment of portnox, we could see all the devices and where they're connecting. We can equally segregate and apply different rules, policies to each location that we didn't monitor specifically."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"It's a stable product."
"The technical support is top-notch."
"For the information security team, the security level was improved because it helped to manage and prevent rogue devices from connecting to the corporate network. The reporting was granular, and reports we scheduled for delivery on Portnox were useful during investigations and audits, especially in cases where the IP address changed."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"The solution is one of the most, if not the most, stable product available."
"The solution is completely stable and operation is user-friendly."
"Tenable is the leading product for vulnerability scanning."
"Has a great advanced scanning feature."
"The Auto-Remediate feature is good."
"The tool gives us fewer false positives. Compared to its competitors, the solution’s reports are more accurate."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is the vulnerability assessment."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"The price could be better."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."
"There is not much room for improvement. However, there should be a guide that describes the step-by-step procedures for doing tasks. Otherwise, training is required from a senior guy to a junior guy."
"The pricing is reasonable, but this could be brought down more aggressively, such as we see with Rapid7, Tenable SC's main competitor."
"Tenable SC can improve by making it easier to create complicated reports and have more effectiveness in the remediation area for comparison between the scans."
"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 solution is expensive."
"The solution needs to improve the vulnerability assessment because we have experienced some challenges with accuracy."
"The solution's user interface has some issues."
Portnox CORE is ranked 12th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Portnox CORE is rated 8.2, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Portnox CORE is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform and Portnox Clear, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.
