RedSeal vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

"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 most valuable features are network mapping and configuration."

"RedSeal has different modules, such as the Analyzer module, which can be leveraged."

"This is the only solution in the world that gives you a digital resilience score."

"It's hard to pick the most valuable feature. All of them are valuable, they're all critical for us... ChangeTrack obviously has a lot of very good features, like the risk analysis, the USP, and the Policy Browser."

"It is extremely scalable. It really addresses the scale of a company's firewall footprint."

"The clarity around the auditing provides the most value for us."

"I like the policy topology map, which allows us to visualize the picture of the security policy of the whole organization."

"Our engineers save quite a bit of time that was previously spent on manual processes."

"It made us look at security policies more holistically."

"Tufin has improved my organization with its configuration management. It has tremendously improved the operation's success and has made life easier."

"We use this product to sharpen our change cycle. A request used to take quite a while as we did manual assessments. A lot of that is now done through SecureTrack."

"The dashboard should be improved to make correlating data easier to do."

"There is room for improvement in integrating the OT security part and the private 5G security part in RedSeal."

"Sometimes, it required us to refresh the configuration. When we integrated any of the configurations into the device, sometimes, it could not detect the exact picture of that device. So, we had to reset the device to see that if it was giving true-positive results or false-positive results. In some cases, we were not able to get true-positive results. There was some kind of bug in that version. Its interface is not user-friendly and needs to be improved. It takes time to understand the interface and various options. Skybox has quite a user-friendly interface. They could provide a feature for compliance audit policy if it is already not there. A compliance audit policy ensures that all configurations are based on the best practices standards, such as CIS benchmarks standard or other similar standards. It provides visibility about whether your device configuration is based on best practices or not. Usually, such a feature is provided by other solutions such as Meteor or Tenable Nessus."

"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."

"They need to offer more support to vendors, such as Cisco, Checkpoint, Fortinet, and Forcepoint."

"The solution does not have automation with other Firewalls."

"The change impact analysis doesn't even get close to actually solving our problems. I am not impressed with it."

"We like the change impact analysis capabilities quite a bit. The only weakness is that the reporting is a bit clunky. We would like to have the reporting be better."

"I would like to see better report integration in this solution."

"With scalability, we are going to run into some issues. We have been talking about converting over to actual hardware as opposed to virtual. Therefore, I don't think we are scalable at this time, especially with the updates coming. I'm told that they're going to need a lot more horsepower to push them."

"There was some complexity during the initial setup"

"The pricing of the solution is rather expensive."

"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 reduced the time it takes to solve a problem, which reduces the time of the outage."

"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."

"This solution helped us to reduce the time it takes to make changes. We used to spend up to an hour to do a change, and now, it's around five minutes."

"I believe our cost is more than $100,000 per year."

"Because we're quite a large company, the price wasn't too much of a factor for us."

"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."

"The pricing is reasonable."