Organizations save costs by reducing manpower needed for scans and report management, significantly enhancing security and avoiding potential breaches. Tenable Security Center boosts productivity, simplifies compliance, and ensures data protection, delivering strong ROI. It aids in preemptive issue detection, reduces vulnerabilities, offers visibility, and stabilizes assessments. Cost savings are notable compared to alternatives like Nexpose. The platform cuts manual analysis costs, increases efficiency, and helps avoid expenses linked to data breach incidents.

Users advise others to understand the difference between security compliance suites and SIEM suites. Proper planning and scheduling of scans are crucial, avoiding daytime scans for business-critical systems. Engaging knowledgeable partners is recommended for implementation. Emphasizing proper sizing and automation improves efficiency. Tenable Security Center is highly rated for its vulnerability management and network scanning capabilities. Working closely with Tenable engineers is beneficial. Consider agent-based scanning for comprehensive coverage, and ensure effective integration with other tools.

Tenable Security Center receives a customer service and support rating mostly in the range of 8 to 9 out of 10.

Most entities utilize an on-premises deployment model for Tenable Security Center, reflecting its widespread adoption in this setup. A minority opt for hybrid cloud environments, while a few choose public or private cloud deployments.

Tenable Security Center is widely regarded as stable and reliable. Users report minimal issues, although some minor bugs or errors occasionally occur. Stability is generally rated highly, often between eight and ten out of ten. Resource management during vulnerability scans can increase CPU and memory usage, but remains manageable. Users note that stability depends on proper configuration and resource allocation. Feedback suggests Tenable Security Center consistently performs well without significant disruptions or crashes.

Tenable Security Center users highlight the need for improvements in reporting flexibility, integration with other tools, and user interface simplicity. They face challenges with vulnerability detection speed, policy configuration, and DNS issues. The platform's pricing and support speed are also concerns. Enhancements in web application security features, risk-based vulnerability management capabilities, and better onboarding support could further improve user satisfaction.

Tenable Security Center's most valuable features include vulnerability scanning, comprehensive dashboards, and reporting capabilities. Organizations appreciate its flexibility, prioritization, and integration with multiple vendors like SIEM solutions. The dashboard allows easy mapping of threat landscapes and prioritization. Its customizable policies enable efficient scans with minimal impact. Users find it user-friendly with an intuitive interface, advanced scanning, asset discovery, and a low false-positive rate, providing an overall score of vulnerabilities compared to industry peers.

<p>Tenable Security Center offers valuable features like Assurance Report Cards, providing an overview of security posture at a glance.</p>
<p>Its initial setup is straightforward, enhancing ease of deployment.</p>
<p>The platform supports highly customizable scanning policies critical in environments with strict vendor controls.</p>
<p>Features automatic scanning distribution, which efficiently manages multiple scans across various environments simultaneously.</p>
<p>Known for a low rate of false positives, enhancing the accuracy and reliability of its vulnerability assessments.</p>

Users have engaged with Tenable Security Center for a duration ranging from a few weeks to nearly ten years.

Tenable Security Center is primarily used for vulnerability assessments, threat landscape management, and compliance auditing. Users employ it to scan networks, detect vulnerabilities in IT and OT environments, and track system compliance with frameworks like NIST and CIS. It supports automated scanning, patch management, and reporting across servers, network devices, and applications. Users benefit from tailored dashboards for monitoring security posture, supporting operations in clinical settings, multi-branch organizations, and enterprise environments.

Tenable Security Center is highly scalable, accommodating various asset sizes from smaller setups to large enterprises. Users have successfully expanded its use to thousands of endpoints and report that adding capacity is simple. Organizations find it easy to manage, with no significant obstacles encountered during scaling. It performs well in both horizontal and vertical expansions, supporting diverse environments. Many user perspectives often rate its scalability between eight and ten, reflecting positive experiences across different industries.

Users considered options such as Qualys, Rapid7, Ivanti, Nmap, and Nexpose. Issues with Qualys were highlighted, including its complexity in on-premises implementations. Rapid7's Nexpose was appreciated for its scheduling visualization, while Nmap and Retina were mentioned as open-source alternatives. After 2018 assessments, Tenable was chosen due to its scalability and government approval. Some users didn't evaluate alternatives, being satisfied with Tenable's user-friendliness and accuracy.

Tenable Security Center automates asset management and vulnerability scanning, enhancing vulnerability mitigation and risk exposure reduction. Users report improved security posture, detailed visibility, and prioritization of vulnerabilities. It integrates seamlessly, saving time and minimizing false positives. Reporting is streamlined, aiding decision-making and audit. Users appreciate its predictive prioritization features and comprehensive internal management capabilities. The tool also supports compliance and confidentiality standards, offering significant cost savings by identifying security issues and safeguarding data.

{"quote":"We observed a significant improvement in the frequency of scanning and patching, increasing from four scans per year to four scans per month.","quality_score":"9","sentiment_score":"8"}

{"quote":"The customer used another solution that only allowed scanning and patching four times a year per computer.","quality_score":"7","sentiment_score":"5"}

{"quote":"The solution is scalable, managing approximately 3,000 assets, and is a business-grade solution.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"7"}

{"quote":"We improved the number of scans and patches performed from four times per year per computer to four times per month.","quality_score":"10","sentiment_score":"8"}

7.75

4.35

{"quote":"The integration with third-party solutions such as ticketing solutions or CMDB solutions can be improved.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"4"}

7.0

{"quote":"The most valuable feature was the patch management, which was very effective for endpoint-centric solutions requiring remediation of vulnerabilities.","quality_score":"10","sentiment_score":"9"}

{"quote":"It is a business-grade solution.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"The solution is scalable, managing approximately 3,000 assets.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"The support is only available in English, which created a language barrier for a non-native English-speaking team.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"I would rate the customer service at seven out of ten.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"The asset discovery phase could be simplified if it could integrate with CMDB or MDM solutions.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"The integration with third-party solutions such as ticketing solutions or CMDB solutions can be improved.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Utopia, which was more expensive.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"ManageEngine is considered an affordable solution, offering competitive pricing compared to similar solutions.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"We improved the number of scans and patches performed from four times per year per computer to four times per month.","score":"10"}

{"quote":"ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus was the perfect fit for managing these requirements.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"The most valuable feature was the patch management, which was very effective for endpoint-centric solutions requiring remediation of vulnerabilities.","score":"9"}

I implemented ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus to enhance endpoint-centric vulnerability management. Its effective patch management increased scan frequency from four times a year to monthly. However, integration with third-party solutions and asset discovery could be improved.

ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus surpasses its competitors by offering integrated vulnerability assessment, prioritization, and automated patch deployment, providing robust security and efficient management features that streamline the entire vulnerability management lifecycle for enterprise IT environments.

{"quote":"Typically one person manages the deployment.","quality_score":"5","sentiment_score":"7"}

{"quote":"The initial setup was rated eight out of ten for ease, with deployment taking around 15 minutes.","quality_score":"9","sentiment_score":"9"}

Users preferred Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway for cost, Office 365 integration, and better configuration over AWS, Cisco, Fortinet, and Novell.

{"quote":"Microsoft's support is rated at four due to issues such as speed of response and coordination difficulties.","quality_score":"6","sentiment_score":"5"}

{"quote":"We deployed the Azure VPN Gateway to connect our Las Vegas office to the cloud. Additionally, we are migrating several offices, having completed one so far.","quality_score":"7","sentiment_score":"8"}

Single individuals often manage firewall and VPN infrastructure deployment and maintenance, even without large teams, for Microsoft Azure.

Most users choose Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway's Public Cloud model, but many others prefer Hybrid Cloud for its flexibility.

7.85

{"quote":"It eliminates the need for expensive hardware and simplifies network setup.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"The solution provides significant cost savings, transitioning expenses from CapEx to OpEx.","score":"9"}

Setting up Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway is generally easy, but network complexities can occasionally make integration time-consuming.

Organizations prefer Microsoft Azure for its reliable VPN Gateway implementation, supporting diverse cloud configurations and operational needs.

{"quote":"Microsoft's support is rated at four due to issues such as speed of response and coordination difficulties.","quality_score":"7","sentiment_score":"2"}

{"quote":"The VPN Gateway is valued for its ease of use and redundancy.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"9"}

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway offers high performance, seamless connectivity, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and secure encryption, enhancing network stability and communications.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway's support quality depends on contract tier, with premium offering superior, speedy service compared to basic.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway securely links on-premises networks to Azure, enabling high-availability connections for hybrid networking and data protection.

8

7.5

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway offers scalable, cost-effective solutions for varying workloads with flexible configurations to support many users efficiently.

Users recommend Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway for easy setup, stability, scalability, integration, with attention to configuration and network needs.

Many users have relied on Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway for three to six years to secure their network connections effectively.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway needs better troubleshooting, stability, affordability, support, deployment ease, and enhanced security and monitoring features.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway offers seamless, secure cloud connections, improving scalability and cost-efficiency with enhanced security and simplicity.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway stability varies, performing reliably for some while others face issues and consider alternatives like Palo Alto.

{"quote":"Prioritization of tasks can also be challenging, impacting the timely resolution of problems.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Microsoft's support is rated at four due to issues such as speed of response and coordination difficulties.","score":"8"}

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway is cost-effective, offering value compared to alternatives despite potential high costs for extra licenses.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway ensures secure, scalable communication between data centers and Azure, supporting growth and reliable operations.

{"quote":"The pricing is somewhat high but acceptable, considering it replaces the need for physical network equipment, leading to cost savings.","score":"9"}

AWS is favored for Linux and simplicity, while Azure offers better pricing and support for Microsoft environments.

{"quote":"This solution also facilitates the migration by allowing connectivity between previously isolated environments and our Americas environment.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"It's cost-effective by eliminating the need for firewall and networking equipment purchases.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"It simplifies the process of deploying a VPN connection, replacing all the physical network elements with a software appliance.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"The VPN Gateway is valued for its ease of use and redundancy.","score":"8"}

I deployed Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway to connect our Las Vegas office to the cloud, valuing its ease of use and cost-effectiveness. It facilitates office migrations and integrates well with Microsoft environments, though paperwork processes need improvement.

<p>Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway offers scalability and adapts to network bandwidth, providing fast performance and supporting various protocols like BGP for secure connections. It enables side-to-side and point-to-site connections, interoperating effectively with multiple firewall vendors. However, the service requires improvements in connectivity stability, troubleshooting, technical support, and deployment complexity while enhancing monitoring capabilities for better traffic metric tracking.</p>

Users mentioned previously utilizing Cisco ASA, Fortinet, ExpressRoute, Novell, Netware, AWS, AWS Direct Connect, and third-party appliances like FortiGates and Palo Alto for networking needs before transitioning to Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. AWS was perceived comparable, yet Azure was favored for configuration ease and integration. Novell offered security advantages. Licensing costs influenced the shift from third-party appliances to Azure due to affordability. Some continued to use both AWS and Azure VPNs.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway pricing varies based on user count and solution capacity, often involving monthly or hourly licensing fees. Some find it affordable, while others consider it expensive, especially when additional services and firewall licenses are needed. Compared to alternatives like ExpressRoute, it is cost-effective for connecting to cloud infrastructure. Infrastructure and virtual machine costs can influence overall expenses. Pricing may pose challenges for smaller businesses but is generally seen as competitive given its features.

<p>Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway surpasses its competitors by providing robust security, high availability, and seamless integration with other Azure services, ensuring secure, reliable, and scalable connections for enterprises worldwide.</p>

<p>Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway could improve troubleshooting features to easily identify traffic issues without needing support tickets.</p><p>Technical support for Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway needs enhancement, especially for those without support contracts.</p><p>A more stable connectivity is required, particularly when setting up device tunnels in Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway.</p><p>Scheduling upgrades should be an available feature in future Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway releases.</p><p>Deployment and monitoring processes in Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway need improvement for easier use and management.</p>

Users find Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway support to vary based on contracts. Premium support receives high praise for its quick responses and resolution quality, while free support is criticized for delays and inefficiency. Customers mention the difficulty in reaching knowledgeable staff without premium contracts. Satisfaction ratings range widely, often noting slow response times and coordination challenges. Many rely on third-party partners or handle situations themselves due to support limitations.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway's initial setup is generally considered easy by users. Setup times range from 15 to 45 minutes, depending on the familiarity with the platform. Some describe the process as straightforward with minimal technical staff needed, while others find it complicated due to networking dependencies and design requirements. Many appreciate the support resources available, and varying experiences indicate that ease of setup often depends on technical understanding and specific deployment needs.

Azure VPN Gateway implementation is handled by managed service providers and internal personnel. Azure components are easily installed by users themselves while service providers manage firewall integration. Implementation is often in-house, requiring minimal manpower. Typically, one individual manages deployment and ongoing maintenance, with network settings adjusted as needed. Teams typically assign deployment tasks to individuals, emphasizing the simplicity and efficiency of both setup and operation without necessitating large teams.

Customer service and support of Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway would be rated between 6 to 8 out of 10.

Organizations moving to the cloud find Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway offers substantial value on secure connectivity, making it worth the investment. Many see cost savings by replacing third-party appliances and converting expenses from CapEx to OpEx. Azure VPN Gateway enables seamless communication between Azure-hosted and on-premises resources, enhancing operations. With scalable benefits, it improves business processes and user experiences, providing a positive return on investment by simplifying network setups and reducing expensive hardware requirements.

<p>Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway offers robust networking capabilities.</p>
<p>It provides scalability, accommodating varying network bandwidths.</p>
<p>Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway supports a wide range of protocols, including Border Gateway Protocol.</p>
<p>Its interoperability with various firewall and access gateway vendors enhances its utility.</p>
<p>The managed VPN feature ensures enhanced security and simplified management. </p>

Users advise others that Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway is simple to deploy, stable, and integrates well with Microsoft products. It requires careful planning, particularly in IP address configuration to avoid issues. Advanced features like BGP are available. It's cost-effective and offers scalability, though it has limited functionality. Users rate it highly for ease of use but suggest more troubleshooting tools. They highlight its reliability and recommend it for its intended use. Users rate it between six and ten out of ten.

For Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, users predominantly select Microsoft Azure, indicating a strong preference for this provider when utilizing public, private, or hybrid cloud options.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway exhibits generally stable performance, although there are instances where alternatives are preferred due to stability concerns. Users report stability as reliable, with ratings often around eight to ten out of ten. Some organizations have not experienced downtime, and many find its stability impressive after initial setup. Monitoring of health and performance parameters is common, ensuring minimal issues for many users who have consistent, reliable experiences with Azure VPN Gateway.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway needs improvements in troubleshooting features, technical support, and cost reduction. It requires enhancements in stability, setup simplicity, connectivity, and zero-day threat protection. Users want more configuration options, better integration with mobile devices, single sign-on functionality, and improved monitoring tools. Deployment challenges, complexity, sluggish connectivity, and pricing issues are noted. Improvements in user-friendly marketing materials and increased compatibility between point-to-site and site-to-site VPNs are also desired.

Most users choose the Public Cloud model when using Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. Several opt for Hybrid Cloud deployment, while a smaller number prefer On-premises.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway is praised for its networking and high availability, allowing seamless connectivity by utilizing multiple internet providers. It offers swift performance, user-friendly setup, redundancy, and supports various protocols like BGP. The gateway is accessible via the cloud, offering secure, scalable services. It facilitates easy deployment and configuration within minutes. Enhanced security features and interoperability with vendors make it reliable. Its managed service streamlines network connectivity and is cost-effective by replacing physical network components.

Organizations primarily use Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway to establish secure connections between on-premises networks and cloud servers. It facilitates site-to-site and point-to-site connectivity, allowing businesses to connect data centers, remote sites, and virtual machines. Additionally, it supports hybrid networking, high-availability connectivity, and aligns with various manufacturers like Fortinet and Cisco. Users employ it for management, data protection, and integration with services such as multifactor authentication through Defender and Azure's security features.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway is considered highly scalable by users. They find it easy to adjust plans for increased bandwidth and features. Many companies have deployed it across multiple locations, highlighting flexibility in deployment size. Users mention scalability varies depending on SKU selection. It integrates well with existing infrastructures, offering reliable support for business growth. Some suggest it could be more competitive with third-party options in terms of extended features.

Users have been using Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway for a range of four months to twelve years.

Users evaluated AWS alongside Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. AWS was favored for its straightforwardness and enhanced networking, but Azure offered better pricing policies. Both options featured similar capabilities, though Azure maintained support for older protocols not covered by others. Evaluations showed AWS's compatibility with Linux was a factor, while Azure aligned more with Microsoft environments, especially with Active Directory. Other alternatives beyond AWS were not considered.

Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway ensures essential communication between data centers and Azure, facilitating secure server connections. It supports business growth with scalable features and provides a secure, reliable connection between on-premise data centers and the Azure cloud. It supports various protocols for maintaining secure data connections. It is used as a native tool, performing consistently whether compared to third-party appliances, crucial for communication and infrastructure expansion.

Users preferred Tenable for its user-friendly interface, accuracy, detailed reporting, and compliance efficiency over other vulnerability management tools.

Users considered alternatives like Qualys, Rapid7, Nmap, Retina, Nexpose, Ivanti, ArcSight Express, Tripwire, Netsparker, and OpenVAS. Qualys was noted for being complex with significant infrastructure needs. Nexpose, Rapid7, and Metasploit were highlighted for features like scan scheduling. Users preferred Tenable Security Center for its comprehensive reporting, user-friendly interface, and scalability. They favored it for compliance features, vulnerability management, and avoiding excessive false positives. It was especially suitable for on-premise needs.

I'm sorry, I can't provide quotes from the specified section as it appears that the content from "stability_issues:[] in 7607271" is not available. Therefore, here's an empty JSON array as requested:

[]

Users prefer Azure for cost and Microsoft integration, while AWS is favored for simplicity and Linux compatibility.

Users considered AWS, Cisco ASA, Fortinet, and other third-party appliances. AWS was chosen for its straightforward approach and Linux compatibility. Cisco and Fortinet were also used with cost being a critical factor. ExpressRoute and older systems like Novell and Netware were explored. Azure was often favored due to better integration with Microsoft environments, Office 365, Active Directory, easier configuration, comprehensive features, and favorable pricing policies compared to AWS.

Organizations moved from traditional firewalls to Azure for its simplicity and cloud integration, while some choose Fortinet for security.

Azure Firewall deployment is managed in-house or with external help, requiring minimal maintenance and occasional rule updates.