Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Security Cloud Control vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Security Cloud Control
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
182
Ranking in other categories
AI Observability (78th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Security Cloud Control is 2.7%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 20.2%, down from 21.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tufin Orchestration Suite20.2%
Cisco Security Cloud Control2.7%
Other77.1%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

FS
Security Engineer at Metrobank
Automation reduces intervention and speeds up threat prevention
Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes The most valuable feature is the automation, as it reduces user intervention and allows us to focus on other tasks. Since the system is automated,…
Vulnerability control saves audit costs and reduces expenses for organizations
Tufin Orchestration Suite is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendors. The analytics features of Tufin Orchestration Suite are challenging to use and require technical expertise, which is a concern as there is not much knowledge in this field in Thailand. The issue of technical knowledge, especially regarding English language proficiency, is significant for government and some companies, making Tufin Orchestration Suite harder to use.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The ability to see the uptimes on the different VPNs that we have configured for site-to-site."
"We have quite a few Active Stone by pairs. If they fail over... I'll see that there's a change on it and I'll have a look. The only change on it is that now this one is the standby, it took over the active role. I can go into that firewall and find out what happened... and troubleshoot based on that. That's pretty cool too."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users."
"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."
"With Cisco Defense Orchestrator, we can manage the complete Cisco Security solution. It provides a simple and centralized way to manage all products."
"The most valuable feature is being able to do centralized upgrades on the ASAs. We can select all of those ASAs, and say, "Upgrade these ASAs at this scheduled time." It will copy down the ASA image, ASDM image, and then do the upgrade and failovers, and then put it all back into service as required at a scheduled time. It automates that process for us."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion prevention."
"When we're looking to the policies, it identifies the shadow rules. It notifies us about anything that will supersede other rules."
"I don't think that we were ever slow, but we can now say that changes are completed within twenty-four hours."
"The automated reporting on a regular basis is helping us to be compliant with legal requirements."
"The designer gives the ability to know where to add a rule, or if the rule is already in place."
"The most valuable feature is alerting, which lets me know when someone has made a change."
"The most valuable features are the Security Risks and Best Practices reporting/Rule base cleanup."
"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."
"We are able to discover firewall rules that are too broad and widen the security footprint."
"They have very good responses regarding integration and internalization with open tickets."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components."
"It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up."
"Integration for Layer 2 devices could be improved because it requires manual scripting."
"I would also like to see them do more cloud integration within the Tufin Orchestration Suite, not within a SaaS solution."
"Our initial setup was complex from two dimensions, because we were deploying it globally and had to have a centralized view, but a distributed approach. We had it in Asia and North America, causing a slightly complicated approach."
"One feature that is missing is the ability to assign a step in the workflow to a specific user at a specific time, based on how the previous steps of the workflow have been handled."
"At least in our environment, the dynamic learning of the topology needs improvement."
"The GUI needs more visibility in terms of licensing because it is hard to tell which products and licensed and which are not."
"The reports could be easier to read and more customizable. Also, capturing some of the different versions, and being able to dig through them could be a bit better."
"They need to offer more support to vendors, such as Cisco, Checkpoint, Fortinet, and Forcepoint."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is about a $100 per year for an ASA 5506 firewall, and from there it keeps going up if you have a bigger box. For example, the 5516 is $200 to $300 per year."
"After our free trial was done we got a subscription for three years and it was under $3,000 or so. It's part of the EA we already paid for, so I don't know what it would be if it was a la carte."
"I work with a lot of clients, and the price or value of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator can vary from one client to another. If you have a lot of Cisco solutions, the price of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator is justified. Whereas if you have some security components from other vendors, such as Check Point or Palo Alto. This solution would be a pretty expensive proposition considering that they don't integrate with them well."
"It's around £500 per unit for a three-year license."
"If you compare to what is available on the market, they are in the same range with respect to pricing."
"It is covered under the CIsco Enterprise License Agreement (ELA). So, it is licensed and ours."
"Its price is reasonable, but it could be lower. It has been cost-effective for us. We have a contract for three years."
"The solution has helped reduce the time it takes us to make changes. It helps make overall integrated changes immediately. It allows us to cut down at least a few hours in the week in regards to changes and monitoring."
"Tuffin is expensive, and we have to explain to our customers the benefit for them to purchase. If we explain the benefits in the correct way they do not mind the price. We typically do costing for the customer for three to five years. We make the general total cost of ownership at the beginning of a project for our customers."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"We did look at less expensive solutions than Tufin, but being a corporation, this solution made sense."
"Our licensing fees are approximately $100,000 USD yearly."
"I had a bad experience with the financial department, and the price is too high. The software does work and does the job. The solution is worth the money. If I had a different partner to implement the solution, it would have been worth the price."
"We have seen ROI just in the time savings and knowledge. Knowledge is power. Having the solution do it automatically for you without you doing the work is huge. If you are spending $50,000 a year, it could have cost you a $100,000 in man-hours without it, especially if you are working with a team.."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,180 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise152
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up. Additionally, I suggest impro...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes.
What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Those who want to use Cisco Defense Orchestrator should build their own use case and see if it fits their environment. The most significant benefit for us is the response time because it automates ...
What needs improvement with Tufin SecureCloud?
Tufin Orchestration Suite ( /products/tufin-orchestration-suite-reviews ) is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendo...
What is your primary use case for Tufin SecureCloud?
I have primarily used Skybox and AlgoSec ( /products/algosec-reviews ). I have also interacted with FireMon for compiling. However, I am not currently working with ACA, and I don't have any project...
What advice do you have for others considering Tufin SecureCloud?
There is potential for improvement in explaining the analytics in the dashboard for Tufin Orchestration Suite. Tufin Orchestration Suite does provide good monitoring; however, interpreting the grap...
 

Also Known As

Cisco Defense Orchestrator, CDO
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Insurance Company of British Columbia, Shawmut
3M, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNP Parabas, ConocoPhillips, Deutsche Bank, GE, IBM, Pfizer, United States Postal Service 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Security Cloud Control vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,180 professionals have used our research since 2012.