No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

RedSeal vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

RedSeal
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (22nd), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (17th)
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
182
Ranking in other categories
Firewall Security Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

RedSeal and Tufin Orchestration Suite aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. RedSeal is designed for Risk-Based Vulnerability Management and holds a mindshare of 1.7%, up 0.4% compared to last year.
Tufin Orchestration Suite, on the other hand, focuses on Firewall Security Management, holds 16.1% mindshare, down 22.8% since last year.
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
RedSeal1.7%
Qualys VMDR9.7%
Rapid7 InsightVM7.2%
Other81.4%
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tufin Orchestration Suite16.1%
AlgoSec16.6%
FireMon Security Manager13.8%
Other53.5%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1339494 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Consultant at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Enhancing network visibility with competitive pricing but needs better OT and 5G integration
The primary use cases for RedSeal are lifecycle management, vulnerabilities, and change management. Customers might look up or use these solutions for these areas RedSeal helps in optimizing the cost for the customer based on different use cases. If the solution caters to a particular use case,…
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

"Overall, I am very happy with the way the product is working."
"If you want to understand your network environment as it relates to configuration issues, host/node vulnerabilities and firewall configurations, then I highly recommend that RedSeal be considered."
"This solution is amazing! The most important part is the way it gives access information to the entire infrastructure, the network most importantly."
"RedSeal helps you prioritize and allocate your scarce human and capital resources where they have the biggest impact to protect your most-valuable digital assets."
"The most valuable feature of the product to me is being able to ask what-if questions about traffic flows, which is a great ability to have for security and incident response."
"RedSeal integrates the network and gives us a visual or graphical overview of our network. If an organization is geographically dispersed, for instance, with one office in Canada and one office in the Philippines, the whole network, including all devices, is integrated into RedSeal, and you can see from where the traffic is going in and out."
"The Vulnerability and Risk Management feature is valuable to us for keeping the security posture up-to-date and conducting regular continuous audits."
"This is the only solution in the world that gives you a digital resilience score."
"Otherwise it does what we ask it to do."
"Tufin is easy to use, which was really important for us."
"Technical support for this solution has been great."
"The Automatic Policy Generator saves time because we are able to identify the required policy when a client doesn't know what he needs."
"The number one benefit this solution provides is time savings, as both I and another engineer save hours upon hours of work spent creating reports, which Tufin now does for us, turning that reclaimed time into effort well spent on other things."
"It’s the fact that before Tufin it wasn’t possible to manage firewall changes; we used emails, and now different departments can actually intervene at the same time on the same workflow and accelerate the job."
"I don't evaluate other vendors every two weeks, but I've evaluated them before, and I think Tufin is quite a technically-leading solution."
"Tufin delivers on everything that we've asked them."
 

Cons

"Although we are talking about a very robust platform, I would like to see the Windows compatible VM version come back."
"The network mapping/visualization could be improved significantly."
"One of the areas of concern is the GUI. It is important to our customers that the GUI looks beautiful. It's a Java Client, so you have a Java dependency."
"There is room for improvement regarding customization and automation of reports."
"The dashboard should be improved to make correlating data easier to do."
"Initially their level one support was very frustrating to work with."
"Integration with other security tools. Have the ability to create custom reports: Currently, within RedSeal you only have the option to run the canned reports."
"Its interface is not user-friendly and needs to be improved."
"The technical support is hit or miss. More miss than hit. It takes them awhile to understand what the issue is."
"It's reaching the edge of stability since we're putting a very strong demand on it."
"Technical support for this solution needs improvement."
"I want Tufin to be used by my entire team, but due to a lack of training and lack of resources, we are not able to do that."
"The only weakness is that the reporting is a bit clunky."
"I'd like to see automation of a number of steps."
"The pricing of the solution is rather expensive."
"Customizing it can be a little tricky, but that depends on your use cases."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is based on the number of endpoints and devices, and we have seen it range from mid-five figures to low six figures."
"Tufin makes things a little easier. It lessens the amount of manual work which we have to do. It has a lot of benefits in terms of revenues, profits, employee costs, and operational costs. We have already seen return on investment."
"We have seen ROI in operational aspects, in terms of how long it takes to resolve incidences which arise."
"It is expensive, but as compared to other players, it's more or less okay. Their pricing is not very transparent. This is my biggest point regarding Tufin. I've never seen a price list or something like that. It's always individual, and in many cases, it's very confusing to know what is the base and what is the price."
"There are ways to deploy the license to different types of firewall. However, if we decide to change the physical brand of the firewall, we need to go back to Tufin and modify the licensing. This is a hassle."
"Our licensing fees are more than $100,000 USD per year."
"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.."
"There is no issue with the pricing because we used a VM. That kept the cost low, as compared to an appliance."
"The price of Tufin could be lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Government
8%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise153
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with RedSeal?
There is room for improvement in integrating the OT security part and the private 5G security part in RedSeal.
What is your primary use case for RedSeal?
The primary use cases for RedSeal are lifecycle management, vulnerabilities, and change management. Customers might look up or use these solutions for these areas.
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

No data available
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

United States Postal Service, Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Interval International
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 Qualys, Horizon3.ai, Tenable and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: August 2026.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.