We performed a comparison between Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] and TruView based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"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."
"We can manage everything with only a single console on the Tenable SecurityCenter. We can pull and define the policy. We can perform every task on the Tenable SecurityCenter."
"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."
"Through porting, we can see how the improvement is happening over a period of time. We can see the overall scenario from the last year, where were we were and where we currently stand."
"The scanning itself is really the core of the tool, and it's what we're most interested in."
"The most valuable feature for us was the ability to monitor sites and get a nice overview of all the data in a single view."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"One area which is missing is cloud security because there are a lot of configurations. Rapid7 has a product called a DV cloud. I would like to have a similar kind of solution and feature."
"In terms of what could be improved, some customers have a problem with SecurityCenter's ticket system. If I want them to assign one of the issues, they may want to assign someone to it or to assign it somewhere else and I may want to break up the ticket."
"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."
"One area that could be improved is the reporting features. In the version transformation from ten to eleven, the platform changed from a Windows-based platform to a Linux-based platform. As a result, the previous reporting feature using Crystal Reports was no longer available. Instead, we had to generate PDF dashboard reports, which were not as flexible."
More Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Network Monitoring Software while TruView is ranked 53rd in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews. Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is rated 8.4, while TruView is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] writes "Provides the best network-based vulnerability scanning, but the dynamic scanning is lackluster". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TruView writes "We lacked visibility into network and app performance, so we chose Visual TruView to proactively manage our network". Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is most compared with , whereas TruView is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, Softinventive Lab Total Network Monitor and Zabbix.
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.