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 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."
"This product provides excellent centralized device controls and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the automation, as it reduces user intervention and allows us to focus on other tasks."
"If our server is blocked, this solution shows us why it is blocked and allows us to update the network routing."
"We use a lot of image upgrades. We take some 20 devices and then we update everything at once, including the policies. We apply policies for groups. For certain groups, like anti-viruses, we send out policies and apply them to every single device. It's really easy and simple."
"When we're looking to the policies, it identifies the shadow rules. It notifies us about anything that will supersede other rules."
"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."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users."
"The biggest benefit for us was the time frame to complete a ticket. It went from approximately a week and a half to two weeks down to about three days."
"SecureChange is the most interesting part. It all comes down to having the user request firewall access and SecureChange, based on workflows, takes care of it, sending two or three emails to the business approvers. With one click, you can automate a firewall rule."
"SecureChange makes our lives easier with automation."
"The solution helps us meet our compliance needs."
"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 provides very good reports. It can easily integrate with multiple firewalls, such as Cisco, Juniper, Palo Alto, and Checkpoint. We can push a policy from Tufin to a firewall, which is a very good feature. We can monitor all access rules and the operating system of a firewall."
"It's user-friendly. It's easy to understand menus on the web GUI. That's a good feature for us. I can say that it's doing what it's supposed to do. It also integrates well with other products like Check Point."
"It made us look at security policies more holistically."
 

Cons

"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."
"They need to work on the user interface. It needs to be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall."
"It would be a better product if it incorporated device control for third-party products easily."
"It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances."
"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."
"The pricing of the solution is rather expensive."
"The change workflow process is getting better. I wish it was a little more customizable. Right now, my biggest issue is that it wants to optimize everything we put in. Sometimes, we need a rule to be more readable, and we want it to go in a specific way. Sometimes, it's difficult to get Tufin to accept that. It wants to optimize and reduce the number of ACLs. On the compliance side, sometimes you just want more ACLs, so it's more readable for an auditor."
"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."
"The firewall management is complex for beginners."
"The change impact analysis doesn't even get close to actually solving our problems. I am not impressed with it."
"They are a little bit behind on some of their support for the Palo Alto firewall platform. I'd like to see that catch up, specifically around importing certain objects."
"Their pricing can be better. It is not very transparent."
"My worry with Tufin is that it cannot connect to Fortinet, which is what I want to do."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It's around £500 per unit for a three-year license."
"Our evaluation showed that Tufin's features were on par with AlgoSec, but Tufin was the better financial choice."
"There is no issue with the pricing because we used a VM. That kept the cost low, as compared to an appliance."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"Our licensing costs are three million total and then we pay for maintenance, which is an additional cost for three years."
"We have seen ROI in operational aspects, in terms of how long it takes to resolve incidences which arise."
"The licensing costs are around $250,000 to $300,000."
"I suggest talking with Tufin about the flexibility of the pricing structure."
"Our licensing fees are more than $100,000 USD per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,410 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
12%
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.
882,410 professionals have used our research since 2012.