We performed a comparison between Skybox Security Suite and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Skybox deployment is simple, and it's very useful."
"Correlates logs and threats and prioritizes; provides network maps;p provides change result context and resulting vulnerability."
"The solution's simplicity of use is its most valuable feature."
"Robust modules can be used for different parts of network security."
"Aside from Firewall Assurance, we are using Network Assurance and Change Manager for an overview of the whole network and for documenting requests and the recertification of the ruleset."
"The solution offers very nice dashboards and they've recently added a very good Java-based web interface."
"The solution's most valuable and unique assets are the vulnerability management and change management solutions because they identify mistakes in the network before implementation which reduces risks."
"The most valuable features are Firewall Assurance and Vulnerability Control."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the vulnerability assessment."
"The tool provides us insight into the happens of the network and its hosts. It provides me with a list of hosts."
"The product is our second solution, and we are happy that it meets our requirements."
"We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data."
"Has a great advanced scanning feature."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are scanning, reporting, dashboards, and automation."
"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."
"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."
"The solution was quite technical. It would be easier to manage if the solution was more specific about aspects of the solution and provided more advisory around how to use it effectively. It would help users a lot if they were more clear about everything."
"The only place where Skybox has room for improvement, and they're working on releasing this, it's just a slow-go, is the UI. The user interface has historically been via a locally installed thick client. They are moving to a web-based console and it's slowly coming out."
"The cloud site could be better. They should provide some use cases to help users."
"There is room for improvement in pricing. It would be better, especially if a customer bought all four modules."
"The tool does not offer options for customization."
"The support could be improved."
"The solution needs improvement in firewall configuration checks. I would also like to see more configuration checks for Forcepoint and for other non-supported firewalls."
"The stability is something that is questionable. I don't know whether it is because of the kind of infrastructure we have or because of the product in itself. We're running it on a virtual machine right now. Maybe once a month, or once in every 45 days, it requires a restart because the application fails to connect. So I have to restart the whole Skybox Manager itself, the Skybox server itself, and then connect to it from our Skybox Manager."
"I think the vendor training provided for Tenable.sc could be a lower price. It's quite expensive for the training."
"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."
"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."
"I will say it's a lot slower compared to an MS scan. It takes so much longer, so the performance could definitely be worked on."
"The solution needs to improve the vulnerability assessment because we have experienced some challenges with accuracy."
"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."
"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."
"The reporting side can be improved. The dashboards are nice, but exporting things out for reports for management was a little tough."
Skybox Security Suite is ranked 19th in Vulnerability Management with 34 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Skybox Security Suite is rated 7.8, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Skybox Security Suite writes "Efficient in vulnerability management, stable and easy to use ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Skybox Security Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, Tufin Orchestration Suite, FireMon Security Manager, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and RedSeal, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Horizon3.ai. See our Skybox Security Suite vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management 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.