I really don't know to tell the truth because we sell many solutions and don't sell exclusively Tenable, so I'm not in a condition to give a precise definition of what could be improved. My perception is this: when customer A needs Tenable Cloud Security, we introduce and demonstrate it. They POC, they appreciate it. The solution serves in such use cases ABC. I am very pragmatic and straightforward - as long as they use or want the solution, I am interested. If they don't, my question is what are the main objections? They may discuss pricing, or they may say they thought the solution had certain technical capabilities that they could not find.
Another team uses the tool. Tenable acquired Ermetic. I think Tenable has features, stays up to date, and upgrades every few months. I am not sure of the tool's use case, as another team uses it. I think another team in my company wants to use the tool for use cases associated with patching and testing. For use cases, Tenable needs to offer a patch-based solution since it is an area where the tool lacks a bit.
I have faced several bug incidents with the solution. Tenable Cloud Security's operational speed also needs to be improved. For instance, I have ten servers that got patched, and only this set of servers is required due to an incident. If I need to run a script on only those aforementioned ten servers and generate a report, it will be highly time-consuming with Tenable Cloud Security. Even if I need a single ad hoc command, the solutions process a whole script for all Linux servers, which takes massive time. Often, our company's management team inquires about a two-day ticket as a live update report couldn't be obtained from Tenable Cloud Security. The product should include ad hoc command implementation and live update-providing features rather than waiting for the scheduled script to run at a specific time each week. The solution's admins don't receive updates within a day; they're obtained when the script runs, and a huge number of servers cannot be run daily. Every server has an off-peak time, and the dependable needs to work out and retrieve the performance graphs.
The product must provide more features. It must integrate with AI. The reporting features are bad. The reports do not have detailed information. We cannot do CI/CD with the tool.
Solutions and Services Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Reseller
Top 20
2024-02-05T13:37:58Z
Feb 5, 2024
The product lacks automatic remediation features. From an improvement perspective, the tool should be able to offer automatic remediation features. There is a need for the support team to improve their response time since it is one of the areas where the product's technical team has certain shortcomings.
Personally, I don't have any critical concerns about this product. As I mentioned earlier, it's a comprehensive and well-rounded solution that provides results effectively. However, I do think there might be room for more integrations. This could allow for further customization and flexibility, essentially offering different functionality options to accommodate various budgets. It's similar to customizing a wedding package to fit different preferences and budgets. This could be achieved through licensing, enabling users to choose specific functionalities based on their needs. For instance, if someone only requires container-related features and doesn't need in-depth analysis of their entire cloud environment, they could opt for a more tailored solution.
Tenable Cloud Security is a comprehensive solution designed to help organizations secure their cloud environments across various platforms, including AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. It offers continuous visibility, compliance management, and threat detection to ensure that cloud infrastructure and applications are protected from vulnerabilities and misconfigurations.
Tenable Cloud Security exemplifies a comprehensive Cloud-Native Application Protection Platform (CNAPP) by providing a unified...
I really don't know to tell the truth because we sell many solutions and don't sell exclusively Tenable, so I'm not in a condition to give a precise definition of what could be improved. My perception is this: when customer A needs Tenable Cloud Security, we introduce and demonstrate it. They POC, they appreciate it. The solution serves in such use cases ABC. I am very pragmatic and straightforward - as long as they use or want the solution, I am interested. If they don't, my question is what are the main objections? They may discuss pricing, or they may say they thought the solution had certain technical capabilities that they could not find.
Another team uses the tool. Tenable acquired Ermetic. I think Tenable has features, stays up to date, and upgrades every few months. I am not sure of the tool's use case, as another team uses it. I think another team in my company wants to use the tool for use cases associated with patching and testing. For use cases, Tenable needs to offer a patch-based solution since it is an area where the tool lacks a bit.
I have faced several bug incidents with the solution. Tenable Cloud Security's operational speed also needs to be improved. For instance, I have ten servers that got patched, and only this set of servers is required due to an incident. If I need to run a script on only those aforementioned ten servers and generate a report, it will be highly time-consuming with Tenable Cloud Security. Even if I need a single ad hoc command, the solutions process a whole script for all Linux servers, which takes massive time. Often, our company's management team inquires about a two-day ticket as a live update report couldn't be obtained from Tenable Cloud Security. The product should include ad hoc command implementation and live update-providing features rather than waiting for the scheduled script to run at a specific time each week. The solution's admins don't receive updates within a day; they're obtained when the script runs, and a huge number of servers cannot be run daily. Every server has an off-peak time, and the dependable needs to work out and retrieve the performance graphs.
The product must provide more features. It must integrate with AI. The reporting features are bad. The reports do not have detailed information. We cannot do CI/CD with the tool.
The product lacks automatic remediation features. From an improvement perspective, the tool should be able to offer automatic remediation features. There is a need for the support team to improve their response time since it is one of the areas where the product's technical team has certain shortcomings.
Ermetic needs to improve its security scanning. I would like to see more dynamic graphical forms.
If Tenable Cloud Security offers a complete Cnapp solution with CWP, CIEM, and Waap security, it will be able to compete with other competitors.
Personally, I don't have any critical concerns about this product. As I mentioned earlier, it's a comprehensive and well-rounded solution that provides results effectively. However, I do think there might be room for more integrations. This could allow for further customization and flexibility, essentially offering different functionality options to accommodate various budgets. It's similar to customizing a wedding package to fit different preferences and budgets. This could be achieved through licensing, enabling users to choose specific functionalities based on their needs. For instance, if someone only requires container-related features and doesn't need in-depth analysis of their entire cloud environment, they could opt for a more tailored solution.