Tenable Nessus Reviews

Every month, I had this Windows Gold image scan. I would obtain some IP addresses, create some rules, and then run them. 

Then there were the automatic automated jobs that I and my colleagues would arrange to execute. 

They would run at night so they wouldn't interrupt the systems. 

Enter some IP addresses for workstations and servers. Some were in a highly secure zone, while others were in a separate subnet, we enter those IP addresses in and run them, scheduling them to run biweekly or weekly.

The most valuable aspect of this solution is that you receive the entire report, which details the breakdown, especially in terms of critical, high, low, and mediums. It also informs you exactly what was wrong with it. Then I believe it copies the CVS's score as well.

To be honest, I haven't used it much to tell you that these are the things that should be improved. But I believe the UI should be enhanced somewhat.

For example, there are two ways to find a report, and people are frequently confused as to which is the correct method for locating a full report. Sometimes they go in the opposite direction, so this is an area that may be improved.

I have been using Tenable Nessus for quite some time.

Tenable Nessus is pretty stable.

Tenable Nessus is a scalable product.

I did not deal with technical support at all.

I used Nessus from JSON for a Gold image and vulnerability scans in my previous role.

I'm also seeking the same type of tenant for internal vulnerability scans like Qualys. 

We now use Qualys, but we haven't fully utilized its features, but I'm searching for something specialized for our internal vulnerability scan program.

I did not set it up myself, to begin with.

It is a good tool. It's not difficult to understand. It shouldn't be an issue as long as you know what you're doing.

I would rate Tenable Nessus a seven out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for vulnerability scanning. 

The solution is easy to understand for users because instructions are included on the platform. 

Scanning capabilities are vast with built-in configurations that are pre-coded for various types of servers. 

There are very few false positives reported. 

It is easy to access and share reports. For example, consultants can extract reports, remove columns if needed, and share final copies with clients. 

Vulnerability recommendations are outdated and not in line with industry standards. 

The reporting tool should allow fancier customizations such as pivot or formula-based options. 

Cloud reviews should be a focus because AWS is taking over the market. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is very, very stable and is considered the leader in stability. 

The solution is very scalable and we have it on every server in our organization with no issues. We only provide user-level access to our security teams. 

Technical support is very good and responsive. 

A few months back, we utilized their assistance for configurations on a custom EMI. They were very helpful and indicated the next upgrade would include a checklist and benchmarking documents for manual completion. 

The setup is very straightforward. 

The implementation was handled by Tenable. There was a one-time installation cost of $500-$1,000 which was nominal for our large organization. 

Tenable either connects virtually or comes onsite to deploy the solution across your entire network.  

Routine maintenance is performed on a local machine with no server needs. This occurs about three times a year by our in-house team. 

Our organization is huge so our license costs $30,000. We are one of the biggest financial sector groups in India, so are charged appropriately. 

Pricing is rated a seven out of ten because it is reasonable but always could be cheaper.

We use both the solution and Qualys which are leading tools in the industry.

Qualys is a complicated tool for users because it does not include easy-to-access instructions. It also reports more false positives. 

The solution is easier to use and includes instructions for running scans. 

Overall, the solution is a better tool than Qualys. 

The solution is a great tool for automation and reducing your team's efforts. If you have the budget and knowledgeable staff, then I recommend you use it. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use it predominantly for vulnerability scanning and compliance scanning as part of the vulnerability and compliance protocols in one of our programs.

The ease of use is the primary valuable feature. This specific version is very straightforward. I like the ability to modify it and configure it based on the different policies.

I also like the number of plugins. It has quite a lot of plugins that keep it up to date with the different vulnerabilities coming out.

Multiple user access would be an area for improvement from a user-access perspective. A role-based access control feature would be great because at present, there is a limitation with only one account. If that account gets compromised or gets locked, then we will encounter problems.

It would be good to have a way to store filters from searches so that you don't have to recreate them from scratch every time. To be able to have them saved as a list of filters would be really useful.

It would be really useful to have a way to assess the risk of a specific vulnerability based on a number of factors which could be tailored. It could be a tailored set of factors you introduce to see a potential risk score or a different view of the CVSS score.

A lot of organizations do this manually, and some of them have some other ways of identifying or assessing the risk of vulnerabilities. It would be really useful to have a framework which allows you to create a way to assess the risk of vulnerabilities on the platform and potentially prioritize them or provide information as a report to management or to other teams for resolution.

It would be really nice to have a way to visualize the different results from the scans. For example, if you scan a Windows 2016 Server and you have a number of vulnerabilities, it would be nice to somehow show the vulnerabilities in a graphical format and potentially combine some of the outcomes into a graphical representation showing trending. Trending is quite important, especially when I speak to my senior management stakeholders and try to show the security posture and status. It would help to provide a long and wide view of where the vulnerabilities are and what kind of aging is present.

I've used it for three and a half years.

Nessus Manager is very stable; I haven't had any problems. I'd give the stability of the product a five out of five.

The product itself is not scalable by design. It is a single-user product, so it doesn't allow you to have multiple users at the same time. You have only one account. The type of product that we're using is not really meant for huge enterprises, and it's a bit more limited in terms of usage.

At present, I use the personal version for the account I'm looking after, but we probably have less than five people using this platform.

The initial setup was easy.

We implemented it ourselves. The deployment was done by one engineer, and it did not take too long.

The project in which I have been using it, it has been great because we satisfy a very crucial requirement. We have brought around vulnerability management, so it's really good ROI for what we have.

Nessus Manager is not an expensive product. It has its limitations, but the pricing reflects that.

We have a yearly subscription.

I would recommend Nessus Manager and rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We use this solution for network and device scanning. Massive scanners have been integrated with the security center. We scan devices and pull the report from the security center. We publish the report to respective stakeholders, and we maintain the reports for our records. The reports show vulnerabilities, plugin text, and plugin outputs. We analyze the report and try to close the vulnerabilities identified in the scan.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

There are about 10 people using this solution in my organization. They were part of the security team and were doing the scanning and remediation. I led the team and dealt with any challenges.

My organization is a service provider. We provide security services to clients.

The vulnerability scanner is the most valuable feature. It's an important feature for us. We use the plugin output for that. It shows us the exact version of Nessus and what is needed for remediation. Based on that, we decide what should be remediated first to get the best result for security.

The agent scanner is a valuable feature. We also do credential scans, which gives the equivalent report. In the log project situation, we receive very good support from Nessus. They have built one policy for the log project itself. With the help of that policy and the plugins specified for the log project, the scans were faster for that project.

If we run a scan, it will usually check all of the plugins, which is a time-consuming process. We received help, and we had one plugin for the log project. That was for checking the log project only because we were already done with the complete scan.

I would like to see more on the automation side. There should be proper tools and support for automation in Tenable itself.

I have used this solution for more than four years.

It's a stable solution, but we noticed that the agent wasn't being updated. This means we have to update it manually and run a few commands to get the service running. If the solution isn't updated with the latest version, it will go offline.

We receive very good technical support from the team in India. We're very happy with them. I'm also in touch with some people from Tenable India. They helped me understand the requirements and the solution's latest features.

I would rate technical support as four out of five because they could always improve.

Initial setup was easy. That's why I proposed the solution to my current organization. 

The deployment process completely depends on approvals and how we're getting the procurement of hardware and the licenses. It depends on the organization.

The solution is worth the cost. It's a good investment. 

I have also evaluated Qualys. There were some missing features, so we weren't able to detect vulnerabilities related to specific software, like Adobe and Java.

I have also used Tenable.sc.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten. 

For those who want to use this solution, my advice is to go to Tenable's website and read about the solution so you can properly understand its features. There are demo videos too. That will help you make a decision about whether you want to use the tool or not.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others who want to use it.

I use this solution for OS auditing, database auditing, virtualization, and following how closely it follows our CI or TISA benchmarks. We also use it for malware and ransomware risk and for carrying out assessments. We purchased this product from a local partner that has a premium partnership with Tenable. I'm a cybersecurity and compliance lead engineer.

The solution makes ransomware checking and OS auditing and implementation relatively easy. It covers most of the requirements for benchmarks for all sorts of widely available required configuration settings in the technology industry. It's also very user-friendly, easy on the eye, and saves a lot of time. It provides us with reports that perfectly satisfy compliance requirements, whatever the device or configuration settings. 

There is very little to improve but cloud security tests would be something helpful to have. Tenable could also offer some penetration testing-related services, which would be beneficial.

I've been using Nessus for three years. 

It's a very stable solution. 

The solution is scalable. I use it for around 4,000 servers on a daily basis.

The technical support is good. They offer expensive professional support, but I generally use the website documentation to fix things. Compared with other companies, they provide very good support. 

Positive

I previously used Qualys and had a bad experience. It's not very user-friendly, licensing was difficult and deployment painful. I also used Rapid7, and I think Nessus is more user-friendly than both of those products. 

The initial setup was very easy and took just a few hours. It's important to plan wisely before implementing. Know how many servers you have and try to project your future requirements so that you can estimate the total number of IPs you require. If the forecast is accurate, the solution is cost-efficient. We used consultants from Singapore and they installed some agents in our on-premise servers. Maintenance is very easy.

The global situation is very unstable and the dollar price has already increased significantly in our country in the last three or four months so everything has become expensive. Licensing is very competitive in our local markets and there's a lot of haggling that goes on. The option of a three-year license would be most beneficial for us because of the huge variations in the dollar. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

I am using it for scanning and checking vulnerabilities. I am using the Azure version of Tenable Nessus.

I like this solution because it is complete. It can scan and check many types of vulnerabilities. It can also check for compliance.

It fits very well in my environment. It is very easy to use, and there is a very good cost-benefit of this solution. 

There should be a possibility to install agents on scanned machines. Tenable IO provides the capability of using local agents to check local problems, but this feature is not there in Tenable Nessus Professional. It would be nice to have something similar in Tenable Nessus Professional. We should have the capability to use local agents installed on the machines to locally check a problem.

It is stable.

It is, for sure, scalable. We have 10 or 12 people who use this solution.

We never have any kind of problem or lack of response. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

It is very easy. It is pretty straightforward.

It has a fair cost and very good cost-benefit ratio.

I would recommend it to others. It does everything that such a solution needs to do. It can check for vulnerabilities and compliance. It is also very easy to use. It is better than its competitors, such as Rapid7.

I trust Tenable solutions. I have worked with Tenable IO a few years ago, and with Tenable Nessus, I had the same feeling that I had with Tenable IO. It is a very good solution. It is more expensive than Tenable IO, but it is a complete solution. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Two of our customers use it for vulnerability assessment and penetration testing, and they are getting very good results.

It is easy to deploy and easy to use. Its reporting is good. From this reporting, you can see the pain point in your network, which makes it easy to fix them. It is easy to understand the reports and export them.

Technically, it is an excellent and the best solution available in Libya. My only concern is related to its pricing. They are an emerging company in Libya, and they need to put in some effort to provide us with very good prices so that customers can go with the best solution. Chinese companies are getting into the market here, and they're providing very cheap solutions.

We have been providing network and solution integration services since 2012.

It is a stable solution. It is the best one in the world. I am not considering any other solutions.

It is scalable.

Their technical support is very good. The feedback that I have received from the customers for the tickets that they opened is that they are satisfied with the service.

It is easy to deploy. It can be implemented in less than 10 days, but complex projects with ISO2007 and 001 compliance requirements can take more than a year.

From our side, there are only two engineers. One is the main engineer and the other one is the backup engineer. 

It is being used by only three users. Two are from the cyber information security team and one is from the network security team.

Its price is high for Libya. The companies here in Libya don't have the awareness of and a good budget for cybersecurity services. If you want them to go for a product, you need to provide something different. This differentiation is related to the price. They should give about 40% to 45% discount per person on the current cost. From our side, we provide the demo and show it as a very good and valuable solution, but when it comes to the price, some companies don't want to own the tool. They prefer to go for it as a service. There are a few companies that are providing it as a service where they own the tool, but they provide it as a service, which is cheaper than a customer owning the product. We strongly recommended that customers own the product and use it. 

I strongly recommend to customers to go for a three-year license to use it, benefit from it, and be comfortable with it. In Libya, we are facing a problem related to the timelines and delays of projects. If they go for just a one-year license and the project gets delayed by six months, they will have only six months to use it.

It is a very good and useful tool. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We are using the product for CIS benchmarking on our systems.

Our primary use case is basically understanding whether our systems are compliant with the CIS benchmarks in terms of system hardening. What Tenable Nessus does is it can run a scan on the systems and it gives us a report in terms of what properties or settings on the systems are in compliance and what are not in compliance. Then we can review that and go back and improve the systems in terms of those settings.

What I like about it is the fact that it can figure out what changes we need to make on our systems to ensure that they're hardened properly.

The initial setup is not difficult. 

Once you get past the initial implementation, the solution is very stable. 

It's scalable. 

So far, it has been fulfilling the requirements. From that perspective, there is not a lot that I would want to improve in the features that we are using it.

They could make their reporting a little better. Maybe they could do some more integrations with certain other tools to extend it or make the reporting better in the sense that it could probably generate some alerts or something of that sort. It could do some real-time reporting. If there are any policies that are changing or getting violated, they could probably generate some alerts, which could involve the on-call on my side so that I could take immediate action. That could probably be one thing that they could introduce.

We've used the solution for about a year now. It hasn't been that long. 

Initially, we had some issues. Initially, we were not very confident about how to configure certain things. Once we had integrated and deployed the product, we needed a few support calls to fix the system properly in our environment and since then it has been smooth, I would say. The stability is now good.

The solution can scale. 

We have very few users. It's basically based on the number of systems that we need to install it on in terms of scaling. That's something that probably is more than the number of users who actually access the system. It's largely used by the security team.

We do have plans to increase the usage of Tenable Nessus organically. As the number of systems that we use is dynamic in nature, it likely will keep going up and down over time.

We've dealt with technical support on and off I would say. We keep talking to the technical support at times to get some insights on any new features that are coming in or in terms of how to use a certain feature that we are probably trying to introduce or something of that sort.

We were not using any other products before this.

For the initial setup, I need to deploy an agent on my systems. It's pretty straightforward. It's not very difficult.

I'm not really sure about how long it took, however, my understanding is it didn't take too long for our system. It was maybe a few minutes per system or maybe half an hour per system. Not more than that.

We did not use a consultant or any integrator for the deployment. We did it in-house. 

There were a couple of people on my team who were able to set it up for us.

I'm not aware of the licensing cost.

I'd recommend the product to others. If a company wants to use it for system analysis as part of the benchmarking of the systems or if a company wants to do security benchmarking, they can use this. They should be able to use the tool.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.