We performed a comparison between Aqua Cloud Security Platform and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar to a sandbox environment."
"The DTA, which stands for Dynamic Threat Analysis, allows me to analyze Docker images in a sandbox environment before deployment, helping me anticipate risks."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"You can easily scale the solution if you need to."
"The features I have found most valuable are its capability to check on the firewall and the routers. Afterwards it checks out all the configs, checks the vulnerabilities, checks the risks - it checks everything that may end up causing our router to be compromised. At the end it recommendations what we should do."
"The Topology Map, which feeds into our SecureChange - the latter being an automation platform - there's a lot of synergy between the two."
"The most valuable feature is alerting, which lets me know when someone has made a change."
"Tufin has made handling firewall rule request tickets more centralized and easier to manage."
"I like the deployment and management of this solution."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of our risk poster in our firewall."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"The solution could improve user-friendliness."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"I would like to see API access into every aspect of Tufin."
"The biggest area where I see a need for improvement is some of the documentation and training stuff. It does a really good job of hitting the big concepts, but it needs like another layer deeper of actually getting into some of the details of how to do some of the things. Conceptually, I understand how the product works, but now how do I start building stuff and integrating it into my environment."
"I would like more enforcement. Right now. it's a lot of alerting. You see it in Tufin, but you have to go to Check Point or whatever device to make the actual action."
"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."
"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."
"We were just talking to them about usage for the F5 platform. They will not be going after specific environments, but a more OpenAPI. They will have other companies write it, etc. It's a little different than I had expected."
"The network part of the solution could be improved. It's too hard because of the Tufin licensing model for the routing devices."
"We need to implement micro-segmentation in our infrastructure, and we are using Cisco ACI. However, we are facing an issue with Tufin, as it does not currently support integration with ACI for micro-segmentation, even though it is advertised as such."
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 6th in Container Security with 16 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 23rd in Container Security with 180 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "Reliable with good container scanning and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Snyk, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and SUSE NeuVector, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer. See our Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.
