We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Tenable.sc based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Tenable.sc excels in detecting vulnerabilities with its advanced scanning and prioritization features. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, on the other hand, offers a wide range of data security features such as governance and administration portal panel. Tenable.sc has room for improvement in various areas such as penetration testing, pricing, reporting, GUI, and support. On the other hand, Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management needs better reporting, investigation, customization, and integration.
Service and Support: Tenable.sc has received positive feedback for their customer service, although there have been reports of delayed responses. Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management has received mixed reviews, with some customers satisfied with their support while others feel it could be better.
Ease of Deployment: Tenable.sc's setup is easy and straightforward, while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's setup may require vendor support or multiple administrators. Tenable.sc's on-prem version involves significant integration, while CloudGuard's difficulty may depend on the connection to cloud systems.
Pricing: Tenable.sc charges based on the number of IP addresses scanned, while Check Point bases it on the size of the cloud infrastructure. Check Point's setup cost is generally seen as affordable and easy, while opinions on Tenable.sc's pricing vary.
ROI: Tenable.sc saves on manpower and has a positive ROI while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is more expensive but provides security and compliance solutions that can lead to a 35% ROI growth rate.
Comparison Results: Tenable.sc is the favored option when compared to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management according to user feedback. Tenable.sc has more advanced scanning capabilities, vulnerability ratings, and a risk-based approach compared to its competitor. While Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management offers valuable features such as data security and automated remediation, users have suggested that it needs improvement in areas such as reporting options, false positives, and pricing.
"The visibility in our cloud environment is the most valuable feature."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"The automatic learning and an AI engine help to find more modern vulnerability problems."
"The most valuable features of CloudGuard CNAPP are its compliance engine and auto-remediation features."
"The product enables us to check the information that goes out of the company."
"It helps us to analyze vulnerabilities way before they get installed in production and the web. It gives us more security in the production environment."
"This platform has allowed us to collect data from multiple sources, centralizing everything under a single source."
"Overall, it provides good security."
"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."
"The scanning part, the agent part – that's the valuable aspect."
"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."
"The solution has a lean and easy-to-use interface that is not confusing to first-time users."
"Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports."
"Tenable is the leading product for vulnerability scanning."
"Very customizable with a lot of templates."
"I found the dashboard features very useful. It made it easy to track remediation progress. I could publish dashboards to remediation teams and track the progress on the dashboards."
"Currently, this solution is somewhat expensive."
"Almost all features are good, however, they still require improvements to the code security portion on which integration with the major source code repository is required."
"Integration could be improved."
"Dome9 should also support deployments that are on-premises and in a hybrid cloud."
"The rules are not well-tuned, and many of them generate false positives or nonsensical results."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"The entire system is complicated, and the setup process may not cater to the company's demands."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
"Additional costs are associated with using the solution, as additional scanners are required for different endpoints connected to the Tenable Security Center. If Tenable Security Center could extract information from these scanners automatically rather than manually, it would enhance user-friendliness for customers."
"The pricing is reasonable, but this could be brought down more aggressively, such as we see with Rapid7, Tenable SC's main competitor."
"Tenable's reporting engine needs improvement. It needs to be more efficient and add more features."
"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."
"The GUI could be improved to have all concerns and priorities use the same GUI, allowing them to see all tickets, assign vulnerabilities, and assign variation failures to each member of their team."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"The product could be user-friendly, and they could enhance the web application's security features."
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 6th in Vulnerability Management with 64 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Qualys VMDR, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Nessus and Horizon3.ai. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.