We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall Manager and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool's support is good."
"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"It is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It is very easy to use. We can get results back quickly."
"The change workflow process is flexible and customizable... If we have a firewall completed and we want to redo it, if we need to re-engineer a particular firewall and open a different destination, we can do that by creating a break-fix... That is one of its useful tools."
"The automation piece is the most valuable feature: having SecureChange make the change on the firewalls, instead of my having to go manually make the changes on the vendor product."
"This solution has helped us to meet our compliance mandates. We implemented the Unified Security Policy (USP). This helped enforce what compliance requirements that we had. We have mitigated and remediated issues that have been brought forth due to that USP showing us issues."
"This solution provides a more organized manner for us to track towards compliance for our PCI audits."
"The automation because it is saving a lot of work, time, and effort required to do all of our manual work. The change impact analysis is pretty good, and with the automation, it takes care of a lot of things which we would be doing manually."
"It allows administrators to visualize the traffic flow, and troubleshoot when necessary."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"The tool's security features need to improve. It needs also to include a monitoring system for logs. It is also complicated to find a query on the Azure firewall."
"There should be a simple one-click deployment for a firewall, rather than a set of setup instructions that include steps such as the DNS configuration, et cetera."
"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."
"One feature that is missing is the ability to assign a step in the workflow to a specific user at a specific time, based on how the previous steps of the workflow have been handled."
"The initial setup can be tough."
"One of the areas that I've had challenges with is making complicated reports."
"We have had a couple issues with the VMs, but I think it was just because they were starving for resources. A recommendation on what the virtual appliances should have for resources would be appreciated."
"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."
"I would really like to see a new UI for SecureChange. SecureTrack 2.0 has quite an improvement in the UI and it flows more smoothly. The current SecureTrack and SecureChange are a little blocky, and sometimes loading a tab or a page is required to refresh information. Whereas in SecureTrack 2.0, they're starting to improve on that."
"I would like to simplify the reports, and maybe have another view besides the charts. Possibly they could be more graphical."
"We found some bugs on the software, but we're working with tech support to fix them."
Azure Firewall Manager is ranked 12th in Firewall Security Management with 5 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. Azure Firewall Manager is rated 7.8, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall Manager writes "Useful testing, simple configuration, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Azure Firewall Manager is most compared with Azure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, AWS Firewall Manager, FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF) and Skybox Security Suite, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and AWS Firewall Manager. See our Azure Firewall Manager 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.
