We performed a comparison between Cisco Defense Orchestrator and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With Cisco Defense Orchestrator, we can manage the complete Cisco Security solution. It provides a simple and centralized way to manage all products."
"If we have a firewall go down, I can hop into CDO, pull the latest configuration off and apply it. That's really good. It helps save time."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion prevention."
"For this product, they are very uncharacteristically interested in resolving whatever issue the customer reports. They're really attentive, and they address whatever we bring up as quickly as they can. That's been a very positive aspect of the product."
"There are a lot of templates that are already built-in. They give you quick-to-create and quick-to-apply policies that are typically a little more complicated for people."
"The ability to do operations on multiple firewalls at once is valuable because it saves time and mental effort. The solution's ability to make bulk changes makes it very convenient to manage things at once on multiple targets."
"If our server is blocked, this solution shows us why it is blocked and allows us to update the network routing."
"The initial setup was straightforward. We spun up the VM onsite. We generated the key that it needed to talk to the Cloud Orchestrator. After that, as I started adding devices, it was relatively quick and easy."
"The automation because it is saving a lot of work, time, and effort required to do all of our manual work. The change impact analysis is pretty good, and with the automation, it takes care of a lot of things which we would be doing manually."
"We are using the visibility with notifications on every firewall change and what those changes were. We have visibility to see who is making the changes, and when."
"It has helped us to meet our compliance mandates. We have some requirements that we need to provide more visibility on the risk levels of our firewall base and Tufin helped us with that requirement."
"The designer gives the ability to know where to add a rule, or if the rule is already in place."
"SecureChange makes our lives easier with automation."
"Visibility is its largest and most valuable feature. You can see everything or all the devices on the network for each customer. It provides you a larger view of what might be wrong with the network and how you can improve it with firewall rules, etc. If you are talking about secure change, being able to automate the entire change process is pretty much the winner for us. It is going to really reduce the time that it takes for us to do changes, and we can just go out and get more customers."
"The change workflow process is flexible and customizable. I was really impressed with it. It's pretty easy. You can add automatic validation steps. Depending on the security matrix, you can pre-allow whatever flow you want."
"The change workflow process is flexible and customizable... If we have a firewall completed and we want to redo it, if we need to re-engineer a particular firewall and open a different destination, we can do that by creating a break-fix... That is one of its useful tools."
"CDO doesn't have a report, an official report that I can check daily. It has another module called FTD, but it doesn't have that specifically for ASA. In the reporting, there are a lot of things that aren't there. There is also room for improvement in the daily monitoring."
"When logging into the device, we sort of had problems with it staying in sync. If somebody made a change onsite, it wouldn't do an automatic sync. It would have to wait, as you would have to do a manual sync up."
"It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances."
"They can centralize all products and provide a correlation about an incident and the response. They can also provide an on-premises solution. Currently, Cisco Defense Orchestrator is just for cloud deployments, not for on-premises deployments. Customers have to manage it on the cloud. We are based in Vietnam, and most of the customers here prefer to have on-premises deployments. Customers, especially from banking and government sectors, do not prefer to do anything on the cloud. Some of the small enterprises use the cloud."
"I'd like CDO to be the one-stop-shop where we could do all the configurations easily. It would be nice, for ASA upgrades, if we could do them from a central repository and not have to reach out to Cisco. That would be a definite plus."
"The main thing that would useful for us would the logging and monitoring. I have to check it out, to get the beta, because I don't have access to them... I wanted CDO to be a central place so where I could do everything but right now I don't think that's possible. I really don't want to go back and forth between this and FMC. Maybe the logging portion, when I look at it, will give me some similarities."
"There could be some slight improvements to navigation. In some of the navigation you've got to go back to be able to get into where you need to be once you've made a change. If I make a change, I've then got to go back to submit and send the change."
"It would be a better product if it incorporated device control for third-party products easily."
"Their pricing can be better. It is not very transparent."
"The biggest area where I see a need for improvement is some of the documentation and training stuff. It does a really good job of hitting the big concepts, but it needs like another layer deeper of actually getting into some of the details of how to do some of the things. Conceptually, I understand how the product works, but now how do I start building stuff and integrating it into my environment."
"I would like easier integration with more automation."
"There were some hiccups here and there with the initial setup."
"The pricing of the solution is rather expensive."
"I haven't seen the cloud integration yet, and I would like to see if we could audit the cloud firewalls, like the cloud-native, Azure, and Amazon. That would be nice. You want one tool to do everything. I don't want to use another tool, or manually go and audit the cloud firewalls."
"The firewall management is complex for beginners."
"For me, there are two things that can make Tufin a bit better... [It needs] a better focus on automation - automating a lot of the processes; and automating rule re-certification, or at least finding a way to simplify it."
Earn 20 points
Cisco Defense Orchestrator is ranked 14th in Firewall Security Management while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. Cisco Defense Orchestrator is rated 8.2, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Defense Orchestrator writes "Provides visibility into entire infrastructure and bulk changes save time and resources". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Cisco Defense Orchestrator is most compared with AlgoSec, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Azure Firewall Manager, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Opinnate. See our Cisco Defense Orchestrator vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
