Core products include Nessus (standalone scanner), Tenable Vulnerability Management (cloud VM, formerly Tenable.io), Tenable Web App Scanning, and Tenable One — an umbrella exposure management platform.

Nessus is a vulnerability scanner you install on a server or workstation. It scans network assets for known vulnerabilities and misconfigurations and is often the first Tenable product teams adopt.

Tenable One unifies findings across network, cloud, web apps, identity and OT into one risk view, with capabilities like Attack Path Analysis to show how exposures can be chained.

Security and IT teams responsible for vulnerability and risk management — from small teams running Nessus to enterprises and MSSPs managing exposure at scale.

Both. Nessus is typically self-hosted. Tenable Vulnerability Management, Web App Scanning and Tenable One are delivered primarily as cloud (SaaS) platforms.

Tenable.io was rebranded to Tenable Vulnerability Management. Tenable One is a broader platform that includes Vulnerability Management plus additional exposure-management modules.

Nessus has fixed annual tiers (Professional/Expert). Cloud products are subscription-based. Tenable One is typically quote-based by assets and modules — confirm current pricing with Tenable.

Exposure management continuously finds, prioritizes and remediates attack-surface weaknesses across environments — beyond classic periodic vulnerability scanning.

Yes. Through Tenable One and related modules, teams can assess cloud misconfigurations and exposures alongside traditional network and host findings.

Nessus focuses on infrastructure/host scanning. Dedicated web-app coverage is typically handled with Tenable Web App Scanning or equivalent tooling in the Tenable portfolio.

Tenable products score and contextualize findings so teams fix what matters first — using severity, asset criticality and, in Tenable One, attack-path context.

Yes. Many managed security providers use Tenable tooling to deliver vulnerability and exposure services to multiple customers.

Most mature programs scan continuously or on a frequent cadence (daily/weekly) plus after major changes — not only quarterly for compliance theater.

Yes. Zerox helps teams deploy, tune and operationalize Tenable findings into practical remediation and exposure-reduction outcomes.

Free standards, guides, tools and training — including the Top 10, ASVS, ZAP, Testing Guide, Code Review Guide, Dependency-Check, and mobile security projects.

OWASP's flagship list of the most critical web application security risks, updated periodically (most recently around 2025) and widely used as a baseline checklist.

Neither in the traditional sense. It's a nonprofit foundation and volunteer community. It doesn't sell products or issue vendor certifications.

Notable projects include ASVS, ZAP, Testing Guide, Code Review Guide, Dependency-Check, and the Mobile Application Security project (MASVS/MASTG).

Developers, security architects, pentestors, students — anyone building or securing software. Core output is free and open.

Through memberships, sponsorships and donations, while project work is largely driven by volunteers worldwide.

The Application Security Verification Standard — a detailed requirements framework for designing, testing and verifying application security controls.

Zed Attack Proxy — a free dynamic application security testing (DAST) tool used to find vulnerabilities in web apps during testing.

As a prioritization lens and education baseline — map controls, tests and training to each risk category, then go deeper with ASVS for verification.

Yes. OWASP publishes API Security Top 10 guidance and related materials focused on modern API attack surfaces.

Generally yes under open licenses, but always check the specific project license before redistribution or embedding.

Roughly every few years based on industry data and community input — not on a rigid annual calendar.

OWASP provides standards and tools; commercial scanners can complement them. Many programs use both open guidance and paid platforms.

Yes. Zerox aligns assessments and remediation guidance with OWASP Top 10, ASVS and related practices where they fit the engagement.

Mobile architects/developers using it as a build checklist, and testers/pentesters using it to structure and verify mobile assessments.

L1 baseline requirements for every app; L2 defense-in-depth for sensitive apps (e.g. finance/health); R resiliency against reverse engineering and tampering.

Data storage, cryptography, authentication, network communication, platform interaction, code quality, and resilience.

MASVS is the "what" (requirements). MASTG is the "how" — practical tests, tools and steps to verify each requirement.

Yes. The standard is platform-agnostic; MASTG provides platform-specific test cases for both.

No. It is a free, open, community-maintained OWASP standard. Vendors may offer tools/audits mapped to it.

When it handles higher-sensitivity data or higher impact if compromised — payments, health, identity, or regulated workloads.

Apps that must resist reverse engineering, tampering and client-side abuse — often high-value consumer or fintech apps.

Through mapped test cases (often via MASTG), documented results, and remediation tracking against each requirement.

Parts can — static checks, dependency scanning and automated tests map to requirements; deep reverse-engineering tests remain more manual.

It focuses on mobile apps broadly; hybrid/cross-platform apps still need the same control outcomes on device and network layers.

ASVS targets application security generally (often web/backends). MASVS specializes in mobile client security requirements.

The OWASP Mobile Application Security project and community contributors.

Yes. Zerox can structure mobile assessments and remediation plans against MASVS/MASTG for iOS and Android apps.

Entra ID, Defender for Cloud, Key Vault, Firewall/WAF, NSGs, Sentinel, and related identity, network and workload protections.

Azure’s CSPM/CWPP capability — posture recommendations plus threat detection across VMs, containers, data services and more.

Microsoft Entra ID handles users, apps, SSO, MFA and Conditional Access — the control plane for who can access what.

Storing secrets, certificates and keys so apps retrieve them securely at runtime instead of hard-coding credentials.

No. Linux, containers (AKS), open-source databases and marketplace images run widely on Azure.

Enforce MFA/Conditional Access, turn on Defender recommendations, restrict public exposure, move secrets to Key Vault, then tighten RBAC.

Yes. Zerox hardens identity, network and workload security and turns findings into practical remediation.

Role-Based Access Control for Azure resources — grant least-privilege roles to users, groups and service principals.

NSGs filter network traffic to Azure resources. They’re a foundational control for limiting lateral movement and exposure.

Azure’s cloud-native SIEM/SOAR for collecting logs, detecting threats and orchestrating response.

Avoid exposing RDP/SSH to the internet. Prefer Just-In-Time access, private connectivity, or bastion patterns.

A pre-configured foundation (identity, networking, logging, guardrails) that sets secure defaults for subscriptions and workloads.

It complements scanners by focusing on cloud posture and workload protections; many programs still use dedicated VM/container scanners.

It enforces sign-in requirements (MFA, device compliance, location risk) before access is granted to apps and resources.

Misconfigurations can expose the API server, secrets or workloads. Weak defaults become high-impact breach paths in production.

Cluster hardening, RBAC, workload security (Pod Security), network policy, secrets, supply-chain scanning and runtime detection.

Controls which users/service accounts can perform which actions on which resources. Avoid broad cluster-admin bindings.

Prefer external secret stores for sensitive credentials, encrypt etcd at rest, restrict Secret access, never bake secrets into images.

Pod-level firewall rules. Default-allow clusters should move toward least-privilege east-west traffic controls.

CIS benchmarks, RBAC review, admission controls, image scanning, privilege review, ingress exposure and logging coverage.

Yes. Zerox reviews posture and supply-chain risk and prioritizes fixes that reduce real attack surface.

Controls that restrict privileged pods, host mounts, escalation and other dangerous workload permissions.

It is the cluster control plane. Weak authn/authz or exposure can mean full cluster compromise.

A gate that validates or mutates resources at create/update time — used to enforce policy before workloads run.

Untrusted or unsigned images introduce malware and CVEs. Pin digests, scan images, and control what can be pulled.

etcd stores cluster state including Secrets. Protect access and enable encryption at rest.

No. Kubernetes dashboards and admin UIs should not be internet-exposed without strong auth and network controls.

Unexpected processes, privilege escalation, crypto-mining, suspicious network connections and policy violations while pods run.