Tenable’s new Tenable AI Exposure bundles discovery, posture management and governance into the company’s Tenable One exposure management platform in a bid to give security teams an “end‑to‑end” answer for the emerging risks of enterprise generative AI—but what it promises and what organisations actually need to deploy safely are two different conversations.
Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT Enterprise and Microsoft Copilot are now embedded in everyday workflows across engineering, sales, HR and legal functions. That rapid adoption has created a new, often invisible attack surface—“shadow AI”—where users run sanctioned and unsanctioned models, share sensitive data in prompts, or connect external plugins and agents that carry privileges across corporate systems. Tenable’s response is Tenable AI Exposure, an expansion of the Tenable One platform that stitches together discovery, AI Security Posture Management (AI‑SPM) and governance capabilities to identify risky AI usage, prioritise exposures and enforce policy controls.
The announcement, made at Black Hat USA 2025, frames AI platform usage as part of the modern attack surface—alongside vulnerabilities, cloud misconfigurations and identity risk—and positions Tenable One as a single pane for measuring and reducing AI-related exposure. Tenable describes the offering as agentless and available initially via a private preview, with general availability slated for later in 2025. These are vendor statements that have been repeated in trade press coverage.
Independent reporting from industry outlets corroborates the timing and the high‑level capabilities, repeating the key claims and quoting Tenable executives. That independent coverage helps validate that Tenable has launched the offering and that the feature set is aimed at discovery, prioritisation and governance. (siliconangle.com, securitybrief.com.au)
That said, several vendor assertions require external validation before they should be accepted at face value:
However, buyers must approach the announcement with operational realism. The product promises rapid visibility and policy enforcement, but the real value will be realised only when organisations can:
That said, the buyer’s journey is not trivial. The vendor claims—agentless deployment, prioritisation accuracy, and policy enforcement—are promising but require empirical validation inside each customer environment. Security teams should treat Tenable AI Exposure as a platform lever rather than a silver bullet: a powerful piece of tooling that must be combined with process, governance and cross‑functional controls to be effective. Organisations that align Tenable’s capabilities with clear use‑case mapping, rigorous pilots and adversarial testing will be best placed to reduce AI exposure risk while preserving productivity gains. (siliconangle.com, tenable.com)
Tenable’s announcement signals one clear fact: AI is no longer a fringe concern for security teams. It has migrated into the core remit of exposure management. Tools that can accurately discover, contextualise and control AI usage will be necessary components of every modern security program—but only when paired with operational discipline, robust data governance and continual adversarial testing will those tools deliver the risk reduction boards expect. (securitybrief.com.au, tenable.com)
Source: SecurityBrief Australia Tenable unveils AI Exposure to manage enterprise generative AI risk
Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT Enterprise and Microsoft Copilot are now embedded in everyday workflows across engineering, sales, HR and legal functions. That rapid adoption has created a new, often invisible attack surface—“shadow AI”—where users run sanctioned and unsanctioned models, share sensitive data in prompts, or connect external plugins and agents that carry privileges across corporate systems. Tenable’s response is Tenable AI Exposure, an expansion of the Tenable One platform that stitches together discovery, AI Security Posture Management (AI‑SPM) and governance capabilities to identify risky AI usage, prioritise exposures and enforce policy controls. The announcement, made at Black Hat USA 2025, frames AI platform usage as part of the modern attack surface—alongside vulnerabilities, cloud misconfigurations and identity risk—and positions Tenable One as a single pane for measuring and reducing AI-related exposure. Tenable describes the offering as agentless and available initially via a private preview, with general availability slated for later in 2025. These are vendor statements that have been repeated in trade press coverage.
What Tenable AI Exposure claims to do
Comprehensive AI discovery
- Discover sanctioned and unsanctioned AI usage across an estate, including user interactions, assistants/agents, and integrations.
- Correlate telemetry from Tenable AI Aware with continuous monitoring and AI‑SPM scans to map data flows into and out of AI platforms.
AI exposure prioritisation (AI‑SPM)
- Rank AI exposures by business impact, highlighting leaks of PII, PCI, PHI, misconfigurations, and risky third‑party integrations.
- Surface exploit scenarios such as prompt injection or jailbreak attempts and prioritize them alongside other exposures.
Governance and enforcement
- Provide policy enforcement to control how AI is used—preventing or flagging dangerous prompts, stopping unsafe integrations and instituting guardrails against output manipulation.
- Integrate enforcement into Tenable One workflows so AI exposures can be remediated alongside vulnerabilities, cloud misconfigurations and identity issues.
Where the claims are verifiable — and where caution is warranted
Tenable’s press materials and the coverage by independent outlets consistently describe the product in the same terms: agentless discovery, AI‑SPM prioritisation, and governance integrated into Tenable One. Tenable’s blog and corporate announcements detail these components and confirm the Black Hat unveiling and private preview status.Independent reporting from industry outlets corroborates the timing and the high‑level capabilities, repeating the key claims and quoting Tenable executives. That independent coverage helps validate that Tenable has launched the offering and that the feature set is aimed at discovery, prioritisation and governance. (siliconangle.com, securitybrief.com.au)
That said, several vendor assertions require external validation before they should be accepted at face value:
- “Agentless deployment in minutes”: this is a strong operational claim. Agentless can mean many things—API integration, network telemetry ingestion, or log‑based analysis—but real‑world deployment time will vary based on enterprise scale, API permissions required, and policy/contract reviews with SaaS vendors. Customers should treat this as a vendor promise that must be validated in proof‑of‑concepts and pilots rather than an engineering guarantee.
- Exposure prioritisation accuracy: Tenable proposes to prioritise AI exposures (PII/PCI/PHI leakage, misconfigurations, etc.). The accuracy of such scoring depends on the fidelity of classification engines, the completeness of telemetry, and the organisation’s data‑sensitivity maps. Expect tuning cycles; prioritisation models often need organisational context that no vendor can preconfigure universally.
- Effectiveness against adversarial AI attacks: Guarding against prompt injection, jailbreaks and manipulated outputs is a moving target. Detection capabilities will inevitably lag novel attack patterns; the right approach is layered controls that include model hardening, data classification, DLP, and human‑in‑the‑loop checks.
Market context — where Tenable fits
The problem Tenable is addressing
- Shadow AI and unsanctioned agents are real and pervasive: multiple industry surveys show a meaningful fraction of employees use consumer/third‑party AI tools for work tasks, often without IT oversight.
- AI agents and plugins can link to business systems (CRM, file shares, ticketing systems), creating high‑impact blast radiuses if abused.
- Traditional security tooling (EDR, network firewalls) was not designed to inspect conversational prompts, agent workflows or the ephemeral data flows generated by LLM-based assistants.
Who else is chasing this space
- Cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, AWS) are adding AI governance features into their platforms (data residency, enterprise model contracts, Copilot controls), which reduce some risk at the vendor level.
- Startups and security vendors are building specialised AI‑security products focused on agent detection, prompt sanitisation, model testing, or AI‑specific data loss prevention.
- The market will bifurcate: platform‑level controls inside hyperscaler ecosystems and centralised cross‑platform exposure management from vendors like Tenable that promise visibility across heterogeneous stacks.
Strengths and practical benefits
- Unified visibility: Integrating AI platform telemetry into Tenable One helps security teams consolidate signals into a single risk view, reducing the need to stitch multiple dashboards manually. This is especially valuable for organisations with sprawling SaaS estates.
- Enterprise‑grade workflow: Tenable’s playbook for exposure management—discover, prioritise, remediate—fits into existing security team structures that already use Tenable One, which may speed adoption and reduce change friction.
- Agentless approach: If the agentless claim holds in practice, organisations can get rapid coverage without endpoint agents, simplifying rollout in complex or regulated environments where installing software is onerous. That said, the precise mechanics (API scopes, log sinks, SIEM integrations) must be reviewed during implementation.
- Focus on high‑risk exposures: The explicit attention to PII, PCI, PHI and unsafe integrations shows Tenable recognises the regulatory hot spots where AI misuse causes the most damage. Prioritising these classes can produce early risk reductions in sensitive sectors.
Risks, limitations and implementation caveats
- Vendor‑claimed effectiveness vs. independent validation: The product’s detection, prioritisation and enforcement claims are vendor‑provided. Prospective buyers should require pilot outcomes, measurable KPIs, and proof points that demonstrate real detection precision and low false‑positive rates before a full rollout.
- Data sovereignty and contractual complexity: Detecting AI usage often requires API access and scanning of telemetry that may implicate data residency or vendor contract clauses. Organisations must reconcile contractual, privacy and compliance obligations prior to broad deployments.
- False positives and alert fatigue: AI usage patterns are noisy. Without tight tuning, teams risk drowning in alerts and misclassifications that could reduce trust in the tooling. Tenable’s models will likely need organisation‑specific tuning.
- Reliance on upstream vendors: Many guardrails for AI—rate limits, data retention, model retraining policies—are controlled by the AI platform vendor (OpenAI, Microsoft, etc.). Tenable can enforce policy at the enterprise layer, but ultimate remediation in some cases requires cooperation with AI service providers.
- Rapidly evolving threat landscape: Attackers are using generative AI to craft more convincing social engineering, discover vulnerabilities faster, and probe model behaviour. Defence tooling must be continuously updated; static rulesets will not suffice.
- Operational load: Finding exposures is only the start. Organisations must have clear playbooks, incident response flows, and cross‑functional governance (security, legal, privacy, compliance) to act on findings. Without those processes, discovery yields little benefit.
Practical deployment checklist (recommended)
- Map the use cases: classify AI use by sensitivity (low/medium/high) and identify sanctioned tools and business owners.
- Pilot Tenable AI Exposure in a contained environment that includes key SaaS apps (CRM, file storage, collaboration) and a subset of users.
- Validate detection: measure true/false positive rates for discovery, classification of sensitive data, and prompt‑injection detection.
- Test enforcement: confirm policy actions (alerts, quarantines, connector disables) work end‑to‑end without breaking business workflows.
- Integrate with IR and GRC: forward findings into the SIEM, ticketing and governance systems; ensure legal/privacy teams can act on compliance risks.
- Tune and iterate: use pilot learnings to refine classification rules and prioritisation thresholds before wider rollout.
- Run adversarial tests: red‑team prompt injection and jailbreak scenarios to validate detection and containment strategies.
How to evaluate Tenable AI Exposure during trial
- Ask for sample detection output and anonymised telemetry to inspect rule logic.
- Require SLAs around false positives, detection tuning, and support for non‑standard integrations.
- Validate the agentless claim by documenting exactly what connectors and permissions are required—some tenants will need custom development or privileged API scopes.
- Measure time‑to‑insight and time‑to‑remediation with realistic datasets and workflows.
- Demand contractual protections regarding data handling, retention and co‑processing with third‑party AI vendors.
The strategic takeaway for security teams
Tenable AI Exposure is an important productisation step for a recognised problem: enterprises need a way to find and manage AI usage as part of their overall risk management program. The product is logical—discover, prioritise, govern—and Tenable is well positioned to bring AI exposures into a broader exposure management framework because of its existing customer base and telemetry assets.However, buyers must approach the announcement with operational realism. The product promises rapid visibility and policy enforcement, but the real value will be realised only when organisations can:
- Provide complete telemetry (logs, connectors, and identity context),
- Map sensitive data comprehensively, and
- Integrate findings into actionable IR and governance processes.
Final assessment
Tenable AI Exposure is a sensible and timely addition to the exposure management landscape. By folding AI platform discovery and AI‑centric posture management into Tenable One, the company addresses a fast‑moving gap: organisations need consolidated visibility into who is using AI and how. The offering is consistent with the market shift toward treating AI as a first‑class part of the attack surface and not an afterthought. (tenable.com, investors.tenable.com)That said, the buyer’s journey is not trivial. The vendor claims—agentless deployment, prioritisation accuracy, and policy enforcement—are promising but require empirical validation inside each customer environment. Security teams should treat Tenable AI Exposure as a platform lever rather than a silver bullet: a powerful piece of tooling that must be combined with process, governance and cross‑functional controls to be effective. Organisations that align Tenable’s capabilities with clear use‑case mapping, rigorous pilots and adversarial testing will be best placed to reduce AI exposure risk while preserving productivity gains. (siliconangle.com, tenable.com)
Tenable’s announcement signals one clear fact: AI is no longer a fringe concern for security teams. It has migrated into the core remit of exposure management. Tools that can accurately discover, contextualise and control AI usage will be necessary components of every modern security program—but only when paired with operational discipline, robust data governance and continual adversarial testing will those tools deliver the risk reduction boards expect. (securitybrief.com.au, tenable.com)
Source: SecurityBrief Australia Tenable unveils AI Exposure to manage enterprise generative AI risk
Last edited: