Tenable Nessus Reviews

Our customers are using this solution. They scan their network, and they get a report about vulnerability assessment tools and solutions.

It's deployed on-prem.

It gives you an unlimited IP scan. It's a cheap solution compared to Rapid7 or Qualys. It's very user-friendly. Customers can easily scan their network.

I would like to have a management option after the network scanning.

The difference between Nessus and Rapid7 is price. Nessus is a very cheap solution compared to Rapid7 and has unlimited IP scanning facilities, but Rapid7 doesn't have this option. It has IP limitations. Rapid7 has some models based on how many IPs the customer wants to scan, and the costs depends on that amount.

The cost is around $4,300 per year. Use is unlimited. You don't pay more if you want to use it for another IP.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

We are using Tenable Nessus real-time monitoring.

The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is real-time monitoring.

Tenable Nessus could improve by having more steady updates which will reduce the vulnerabilities.

I have been using Tenable Nessus for approximately 10 years.

Tenable Nessus is a stable solution, we are fairly satisfied.

I rate the scalability of Tenable Nessus an eight out of ten.

Most of the people using this solution at this time are managers.

The technical support has been very useful. They are helpful.

I rate the technical support from Tenable Nessus a four out of five.

The initial setup has been straightforward. However, we are trying to roll out our agents and find all of our devices which we have experienced some challenges. The whole process has taken us approximately three months.

We are doing the implementation in-house.

I would advise others that if this solution fits your use case then I would try it out. Different environments require different solutions.

I rate Tenable Nessus an eight out of ten.

Over 15.000 active assets|inside 10 companies belonging to the group, the biennium recurrent project mapped the real situation, in parallel with photography of IT/Security maturity through three main domains: processes, people, and technology. 5 TOEs: Infrastructure, Databases (SQL and Oracle in deep), AWS Cloud, Connectivity (Routers, Switches, and Firewalls against/based CIS) and Web Application instances (partial tests). Nessus running over a hardened Linux customized with HA (High Availability).

Nessus has more plugins/add-ons, tests, and templates than previous tools (OpenVas) and it is faster and customizable using CLI/API features. It offers enough resources for an interesting cost-benefit rating (for small and medium companies) and minus false-positive events per type of asset. 

It helped us to quickly produce a QuickWin report that guided the VulnerabilityMgmt actions and plans within the company's during the next 3-5 years using the same tool/investment/team for all companies inside the de group.  

Scanners and reports using CIS templates ("de-facto" standard, easy to fix and to locate correction tips in the documentation), tests against cloud providers, database profiles, several types of telecom devices, and other highly customizable scans. You can scale your environment to gradually increase the quality, depth, and quantity of the tests, enabling you to learn and gradually optimize your vulnerability management platform(s)/instance(s). The possibility of integration with other market tools (Kenna, Archer...) is another differential.

- Add the possibility to customize attributes that define the assets critical level based on the company's "business sense".

- Improve integration and tests for OT platforms, OT application, OT hardware, and non-Ethernet protocols.

- Improve the exchange of info/insights/attributes with RM (Risk Management) domain.

- Offer a more flexible strategic and high-level dashboards based on previous comments (minus technical and more business-oriented)

- Model OS costs (and its segregation schema for individual modules).

7+ years with Tenable and more than 15y with others.

Excellent. No one problem during operation time and deployment.

Enough (faster than OpenVAS engine).

It SLA/support are enough. 

Neutral

OpenVAS. We reached the previous level/threshold/maturity using OpenVas (more limited tool when compared with Nessus). I/We believe that, the change to a better tool (in this and in others categories) should be carried out when these indicators are reached.

Very simple and fast.

In-house.

Good. Nessus Pro combined with other xLAP solutions to offer a presentation/grouping layer is great. Using SC this curve/point of ROI is slower.

Start small, learn about your problems/fixing time and grow up gradually.

Several. OpenVas, Rapid7, Qualys, CORE* and Retina.

A cost/benefit interesting tool.

We primarily use the solution for our customer vApp, the dynamic application testing using NetWeb application and security and the infra scanning. It allows us to do a weekly scan for our customers. 

The solution was a great help during the pandemic for closing down all those open vulnerabilities. Continuous scanning of the infra was helpful for identification on the web applications level.

The solution is the most dynamic one I have seen thus far. It is one of the best available solutions. It is the best vulnerability tool that is available at present. 

While Tenable Nessus is a good enterprise solution, the high price would likely make it prohibitive to smaller organizations. 

We feel the licensing cost to be too high for our customers and us. 

EQA's and dashboards should be addressed in the next release. 

We have been using Tenable Nessus for four or five years. I believe that our practice team is doing so. 

The solution is highly reliable. 

Scalability is not an issue. 

Tech support is good. I think we are now partnered with Tenable.

The initial setup was straightforward. The solution was very easy to set up and configure.

We have a yearly subscription license. 

We have a partnership for filling Tenable Nessus as a manager product for our customers. 

Though it is a good enterprise solution, it is likely too highly priced for smaller organizations. 

We feel the licensing cost to be too high for our customers and us.

We have both on-premises and cloud-based deployment in our organization. 

The solution is good. 

I rate Tenable Nessus as a nine out of ten. 

I use Zoom for virtual meetings. 

Overall Zoom is a good solution.

I have found it is sometimes difficult to control the Zoom meeting sessions. For example, it is difficult to know who is talking and when trying to mute everyone but the speaker you end up muting everyone. When using multiple screens it is laborious to find the control buttons, such as to start a session. Additionally, when a recording is done I have found it difficult to find them, there should be an easier way to retrieve them.

In a future release, the recordings should be able to be enhanced. I am not fully sure if it is the speed of the network or what the challenge is but we record our Zoom meetings and then I edit them to make them into a presentation. There are times when people are grainy, or their sound is not the best. Zoom should have an optimization option for those wanting to do recordings to allow them to receive the best experience. Alternatively, they could give tips on the best configuration settings for the highest recording output quality. For example, Is the user using the most current version of Zoom, or have they blocked out the background noise.

I have been using Zoom for approximately 10 years.

I have used Teams, ON24, and Citrix.

The solution has free options.

Zoom is a great solution. I did appreciate during the pandemic they offered it for free for a certain amount of callers. I thought that gesture was really great. 

I rate Zoom a ten out of ten.

We use this solution for information gathering and as an assessment tool.

Tenable Nessus is one of the best vulnerability assessment tools, that I know.

The price could be improved. They need more flexible pricing.

If they had a very creative idea, maybe they could add a special feature. Even extending functions, or exploring new areas. If they were able to integrate it with the existing solution, that would be fine.

I would like to see more integrations, more ideas or services, and functions offered.

It's about wider functionality and not a question of integration. It's more a question of, creativity. If they have other ideas such as what could be added to the vulnerability management. 

I have been using Tenable Nessus for five years.

Tenable Nessus is a stable product.

It's a scalable solution.

Nessus we either use Nessus for projects for ourselves in many situations, and they also deliver Nessus as a solution for at least five clients. We also have approximately 10 users in our organization.

My experience with technical support is very positive.

The installation was easy.

It took approximately six hours to install and deploy.

We need two for the deployment and maintenance, we have two or three people.

In general, it is extremely expensive. If they have a higher price, that's fine, but if there were one or two solutions where you can buy something for a cheaper price then that would make sense for many users.

I understand why it's expensive, but it would be good to have a limited solution with cheaper prices.

There are different solutions for purchasing Nessus, which is not possible with Datadog.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate Tenable Nessus a nine out of ten because it has many dimensions.

As new upgrades to the software come out periodically, I am currently using the latest version. 

I feel comfortable with the solution's vulnerability scanning capabilities.

While the solution is great for scanning servers, its features are limited when it comes to scanning network devices for vulnerabilities. 

I have been using Tenable Nessus since 2015. 

I can say that I am satisfied with Tenable Nessus' support and customer relations, which is why I'm still with the solution.

Technical support is very user-friendly. Upon entering their forum I can easily find the answers I seek, which I feel to be understandable and helpful. I have not any issues with the software that would have given me reason to engage technical support. 

I did not use an alternate solution prior to Tenable Nessus and have been using it since the inception of my career in information security. 

The installation of the solution was extremely easy. 

There was no need for me to involve my system administrator in the installation process, as I was able to handle it on my own. It is easy to install the solution on any server. 

The price is reasonable. 

I am actually using the solution in three or four different organizations, including Engro and Martin Dow. 

There are two or three people using the solution in my organization on an ongoing basis in key dedicated positions. 

As Tenable Nessus lacks adequate network vulnerability scanning features, I rate it as a seven out of ten. 

While Nessus produces good software, I would like it to allow me to better utilize my homepage. The report structures should be more gradual and effective. Also, other components, such as certain vulnerabilities and Malware detection, should better reflect on the console or dashboard. Nessus does not make this available as there is no centralized dashboard. So too, I require a cloud-based Tenable product, not the one available, which is on-premises.

We have already entered an agreement with Nessus for Tenable.io., following contact I established with South Boston.

Once a person takes part in the demo offered by Tenable.io, we are talking about, more or less, VAS software. The VAS feature is absolutely nice. We have already addressed the coming roadmap with Nessus and it will not include these features. Consequently, perhaps Tenable.io will be the next step. Users such as ourselves will definitely be looking at a different application.

I have been using the solution for the past four years. 

Tenable Nessus is an absolutely stable and fantastic product. As a customer I would give it a 90 percent out of 100 rating.  This is because we have been really satisfied with its use over the past four years. The company and market standards are growing and the margin standard is going up.

Tenable Nessus is competitively slower than Tenable.io.

We are currently trying to procure Tenable.io from Nessus.

I would definitely recommend Tenable Nessus to those who are operating in small environments, with like-sized infrastructure.

When it comes to a big company we should look towards OpenView. Tenable Nessus is not feasible for a large company. For a team comprising 1,000 people, it would be too unstable. Instead, Tenable.io. would be the appropriate choice since it contains a completely different infra.

I rate Tenable Nessus as an eight out of ten.