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 most valuable feature is the automation, as it reduces user intervention and allows us to focus on other tasks."
"The bulk changes feature is definitely the most valuable."
"When we're looking to the policies, it identifies the shadow rules. It notifies us about anything that will supersede other rules."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature is that you can push one policy or one rule out to several devices at a time."
"We are able to stay compliant with many of the regulations."
"The reports that this solution provides are very useful."
"The most valuable feature of Tufin is rule analysis."
"We built the policy comparison reporting into our processes that before we push any change to production, an engineer will stage actual date rule changes and policy changes. Another engineer will go in and do a comparison report of the last push policy to the last save, making sure what has been changed is what is expected to. From an operational excellence, it's huge for us. We have huge policies. All it takes is one accidental right click, delete, or backspace button, which could impact our business. So, this is something that we use almost day in and day out."
"This has helped us to better clean up and audit changes to the firewall policy."
"The clarity around the auditing provides the most value for us."
"Valuable features include a central pane of management for all the firewalls and the ability to do queries on the rules and understand in which files the rules are configured."
"The most valuable function is the SecureChange where it is able to automate everything from the validation of the rules to the pushing of the rules."
 

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."
"They need to work on the user interface. It needs to be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"We had some MX devices that were blocking Windows Update from happening. We found out it was a Meraki issue, but it would have been nice if it had been flagged for us: "Hey, these updates are failing because the MX is blocking it." It wasn't a huge problem, but there was a loss of our time as well as the fact that the updates didn't get pushed out... It would have been nice if CDO had let us know that that was an issue."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components."
"If I make a change locally to the firewall, CDO gives an alarm or an error message and says there's a change in compliance: "The firewall has this configuration but the last time it was compiled it had that configuration." That view of new changes versus the old could be better... I had to log in manually, locally on the firewall, to check which version, which configuration was actually running. I couldn't see it in CDO."
"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."
"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."
"The initial setup of Tufin was complex. We had some issues with the architecture."
"We had a discussion in the Customer Advisory Board yesterday around use of SecureChange. We would like to have an opportunity for an engineer to choose if you want to make or take the policy which has been suggested by the designer functionality, making it more human readable or less human readable (more or less granular). This would be huge for the customers who are using SecureChange. They said this was one of their issues with it, especially for anything that was going into a regulator's or auditor's hands. The more human readable, the better that it would be, and this would definitely be applicable to our industry. It sounds like they are working on this issue, or they took the feedback, but that would be a big one for us in being able to make the jump to SecureChange."
"USP does not support VPNs, which is a big thing for us, so we haven't been able to utilize it."
"Our project is running on Riverbed for SDN. I don't know if Tufin can integrate with Riverbed. Other than that, I have no issues with this product."
"I would like to simplify the reports, and maybe have another view besides the charts. Possibly they could be more graphical."
"There are pros and cons to the workflow. You cannot customize it fully and there are some limitations. You cannot create a pure object, a firewall, IP, or service (single layer) object. You can only create a firewall object group. That is one of the challenges."
"We will be using the appliance based product, which cannot be scaled as much. It is a limitation in the hardware."
"I think that the interface could be cleaner, and easier to use."
 

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."
"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."
"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."
"If you compare to what is available on the market, they are in the same range with respect to pricing."
"Our licensing costs are three million total and then we pay for maintenance, which is an additional cost for three years."
"Licensing is on a customer by customer basis."
"The additional piece, which we are buying and doesn't include our other solution, is close to 300,000."
"It's quite an expensive solution."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"We have seen ROI in operational aspects, in terms of how long it takes to resolve incidences which arise."
"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.."
"Our evaluation showed that Tufin's features were on par with AlgoSec, but Tufin was the better financial choice."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
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.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.