We performed a comparison between AlgoSec and Tufin based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Although the setup and support could use some improvement for both solutions, the easy integration with widely used firewalls put AlgoSec slightly ahead of Tufin.
"The Compliance module is one of the best features which can help anyone to perform security review with predefined security matrix configurations. The compliance module can save a lot of time for security reviews and provide full visibility of the risk required in firewall change requests."
"We have reduced the attack surface of risky rules, improved our compliance scores, and streamlined our firewall change flow all thanks to AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer."
"There are some legacy customers still using AlgoSec. The benefit is the ease in management of firewalls and rules."
"It has reduced the workload for the firewall team thanks to the API integration with our ticketing system, handling the standard types of requests automatically."
"AlgoSec has helped us save time by having one central location to view firewall policies, especially when crossing multiple vendors."
"The technical services personnel are very confident and provide good assistance."
"To be able to monitor all firewalls under one umbrella."
"Auditors can get PDF or CSV reports without having to give them access to firewalls."
"The most valuable feature of Tufin is rule analysis."
"One of the main things is to look at what policies haven't been hit, so we can remove those remnant policies when people come in, use it, and it's still left on the Check Point. So when a couple of users say, "This is not needed anymore." We'll remove it."
"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."
"It provides a comprehensive overview of what our network looks like in terms of what is allowed and what is not, then how the traffic' is flowing with the Network Topology Map."
"The consolidation of other firewall vendors is very valuable."
"The best feature for me is being able to look up objects within all of our policies, because we have a little over 12,000 rules and over 30,000 objects. When one person says, 'Hey, where's my server?' I can just go to Tufin and say, 'Hey, where is that server?' and very quickly it tells you where it is, what policy it's on. That is a life saver."
"The change workflow process is flexible and customizable. We have one guy who has never logged into Tufin ever in his life. He sits down and in 30 minutes had written an automation routine, then went back and changed it. He did that with no training. For me, that is a major benefit."
"Our engineers save quite a bit of time that was previously spent on manual processes."
"The reports are lacking information when they come out. They will not pull the URL or application information from Cisco FTDs. I know this works for Palo Alto Firewalls, which we currently do not have. If they could improve the integration with Cisco FTDs as a whole, that would be immensely helpful."
"Default standard support at Level 1 is to answer by upgrading to the latest released version, if you are not using it yet."
"The product should support more vendors with the same in-depth analysis that it already is providing. This would give more reasons to for other companies to adopt it."
"Fireflow needs to be a little more user-friendly."
"The Firewall Analyzer module can be improved to implement a vulnerability management solution, or they can link Firewall Analyzer with a vulnerability management solution in order to get a better overview of what's going on in our network in terms of vulnerabilities."
"It would be nice if it was more variable when checking virtual domain baseline in the same way as Fortigate's firewalls do."
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly for low-profile users so that we can give some kind of access to specific people around the company for self-configuration of specific rules."
"I would like the reporting to be more customizable, as per user and auditing needs."
"The network part of the solution could be improved. It's too hard because of the Tufin licensing model for the routing devices."
"The product should integrate with the UTM features."
"At least in our environment, the dynamic learning of the topology needs improvement."
"The initial setup was time consuming."
"It would be great to add a link to Visio to create shapes directly from Tufin, as it has the configuration."
"I would like to see API access into every aspect of Tufin."
"The metrics need improvement. They need more consistency or understanding of automation, along lines of customization of automation."
"The interface is like a 1990s kind of thing. It's a little ugly. There are many things that you cannot tweak, little things like the column width and how you display the information. You end up exporting everything to an Excel file and doing your work there."
AlgoSec is ranked 1st in Firewall Security Management with 173 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. AlgoSec is rated 9.0, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AlgoSec writes "Gives us the ability to dig down into details and work at a level above the skills that we already have". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". AlgoSec is most compared with FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Fortinet FortiManager, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Cisco Defense Orchestrator. See our AlgoSec vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.
We monitor all Firewall Security Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
