2018-03-12T13:28:00Z

What needs improvement with Tenable SC?


Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Tenable SC.

What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?

Guest
99 Answers

author avatar
Top 10Consultant

There should be an easier way to build your own type of reports because the data is there but it is quite painful to get what I want from it. I prefer Tenable SC to other solutions.

2020-04-06T08:22:00Z
author avatar
Top 10Real User

Using the product — especially very early on — even though we have things like prioritization, it can be a little verbose in that there's a lot of information being streamed out of the reports. What would be nice, and maybe we just haven't found it, would be more of an executive-type view. We still expect it to collect all this information, but we would like a feature that would allow us to show it to an executive or a director or someone like that and give them some type of high-level overview but not get into the nitty-gritty.

2019-11-14T06:34:00Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

We need to give more customer demos and also highlight the strengths of the product that have been developed over a twenty-year period. The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator.

2019-09-20T05:17:00Z
author avatar
Real User

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. It does great for things for the API. For instance, if we say, "What vulnerabilities do we have?" or "How many things have we scanned?" those things are great. But if we want to know more trending stuff over time, it can create a chart, but that's in a format which is really difficult to get into another program. Integration into other reporting platforms, or providing more specific scanning program metadata, would be an opportunity. It does have a fully-bolstered API which is available online that you can look at, but it is more aimed at getting more vulnerability information out instead of reporting information out.

2019-06-30T10:29:00Z
author avatar
Top 20Real User

In terms of the reporting, it's good for IT tools, but it doesn't give me contextual insight into what device, what kind of medical equipment it is. And in my world, that's a big deal. That's a con, given what my needs are. We can't integrate it with our biomed database to correlate data. So I can know what vulnerabilities are on it by IP address, but it doesn't tell me what device it is. Is it an MRI or a workstation? Is it the workstation which is running MRI's or is it the one that's just pulling patient images? Things like that are things that I need to know, and usually the tool can't do that in and of itself. With that said, we do have some work toward some other integrations to try to improve some of that. Also, I don't know of a process right now to do what I'll call mass risk-acceptance. I have thousands of devices which allow high and critical vulnerabilities and there's really not much I can do about it. But if we put a firewall in front of it, the risk of the whole device is accepted. I need to be able to accept all those risks in the tool. It's really not easy to do within my workflow at this time. There are ways to get around it, but they're not conducive to what I do in my work. 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. Finally, the way we're using it now, for routine scans, it's only good for as long as a device is active on the network. That's one of my biggest concerns at this time: What about the stuff I don't have access to on the network when it runs the scans?

2019-05-30T08:12:00Z
author avatar
Real User

The web application scanning area can be improved. A feature that I would like to see is the ability to integrate with exploit tools.

2019-05-09T13:12:00Z
author avatar
Real User

One of the challenges that we may have experienced with that platform would be the flexibility of how to modify or create. They have this configuration compliance audit function, so if ever an organization has their own configuration standards that should be set on their servers, you have to modify those plugins in Tenable for it to match the specific values that you are looking for when you perform the configuration assessment on your equipment. It is a small challenge because it uses regular expressions on their plugins and so we are having a hard time either creating a blank template from scratch. We usually base our compliance audit plugin on an existing one and then modify the values or describe whatever is not up to our standards. A good plugin editor is an additional option for the Security Center.

2018-12-13T11:34:00Z
author avatar
Top 20Real User

In terms of the configuration of the reports, there's some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve. In terms of configuring the reports to achieve certain percentages and all of that. So, that's really the main thing I've noticed. But, apart from that, I think it's one of the best vulnerability management tools I've used, in terms of giving us the full visibility into the environment.

2018-10-28T09:33:00Z
author avatar
User

Security Center's vulnerability scanners are excellent in terms of compliance reporting, and the dashboards certainly seem to make the less technical of our staff all starry-eyed, but to be honest, I find SecurityCenter to be lacking in too many ways where my usage of it has been concerned. Dashboards, to me, are much less interesting than a powerful and flexible query engine, and that's an area where I find SecurityCenter most lacking.

2018-03-12T13:28:00Z
Learn what your peers think about Tenable SC. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
441,726 professionals have used our research since 2012.