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

Cisco Security Cloud Control vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

Cisco Security Cloud Control
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
182
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Security Cloud Control is 4.2%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 16.1%, down from 22.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tufin Orchestration Suite16.1%
Cisco Security Cloud Control4.2%
Other79.7%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

FS
Security Engineer at Metrobank
Automation reduces intervention and speeds up threat prevention
Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes The most valuable feature is the automation, as it reduces user intervention and allows us to focus on other tasks. Since the system is automated,…
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

"When we're looking to the policies, it identifies the shadow rules. It notifies us about anything that will supersede other rules."
"If our server is blocked, this solution shows us why it is blocked and allows us to update the network routing."
"The most valuable feature is that you can push one policy or one rule out to several devices at a time."
"The ability to see the uptimes on the different VPNs that we have configured for site-to-site."
"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion prevention."
"We use a lot of image upgrades. We take some 20 devices and then we update everything at once, including the policies. We apply policies for groups. For certain groups, like anti-viruses, we send out policies and apply them to every single device. It's really easy and simple."
"This product provides excellent centralized device controls and reporting."
"The main return on investment is time, and the first time a firewall went down the savings probably exceeded what CDO costs."
"It is a really good product; it does exactly what you want it to do."
"This solution has helped us with compliance because we're able to map out certain firewall rules against compliance requirements, and we're able to write reports to show us exactly what our firewalls look like in those areas."
"We use Tufin to clean up our firewall policies. It benefits us, because you can run a query for whatever your cleanup criteria is, e.g., "Has it been hit in 90 days?" It displays the list, then you can see the rules right there. If you want to get rid of it (or highlight it), then it creates a ticket that goes ahead and flags them all as disabled. While you can delete them, we always disable first. Then, we have a strip that comes back, and if it's been disabled for 90 days, then the system will remove them."
"The customer service is superb and quite good."
"This solution helps us ensure that security policy is followed across our entire hybrid network. You can have a Unified Security Policy which reaches across all networks, so if you are having a change submitted, it doesn't matter if you're enforcing it or not. You can get an alert saying, "This is a violation." That's a value-add."
"Just buy it."
"With the firewall policy management with Check Point, we found great value in the tracking, specifically given that we use rules and we use objects within those rules."
"It understands my need to make sure that there are specific metrics that we are looking at and with those seeing across our technologies, as opposed to just a vendor technology building reports."
 

Cons

"I wanted CDO to be a central place so where I could do everything but right now I don't think that's possible."
"They can centralize all products and provide a correlation about an incident and the response. They can also provide an on-premises solution. Currently, Cisco Defense Orchestrator is just for cloud deployments, not for on-premises deployments. Customers have to manage it on the cloud. We are based in Vietnam, and most of the customers here prefer to have on-premises deployments. Customers, especially from banking and government sectors, do not prefer to do anything on the cloud. Some of the small enterprises use the cloud."
"If I had to say anything negative it's the price point."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components."
"Right now, there's no benefit to doing changes through CDO; it doesn't save me time."
"They need to work on the user interface. It needs to be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"It hasn't really improved our organization. It has been more like a PoC which was spun up and played with for a little while, and we haven't gotten back to it."
"They can also provide an on-premises solution. Currently, Cisco Defense Orchestrator is just for cloud deployments, not for on-premises deployments."
"We actually had a key issue, which was a bug, that the development team didn't want to fix. We escalated it, then it got fixed. So, the management level seems very responsive at least, but at a support level, they are just regular support people and not outstanding."
"The product should integrate with the UTM features."
"Currently, we are able to monitor access rules and the operating system of a firewall. It would be great if we can also monitor the configuration of the firewall through Tufin."
"It works really well when you have a single-vendor solution but it's just not as intuitive if you have back-to-back firewalls or you have a complex topology."
"I have seen some issues with the stability. One of the things that we noticed was when R18 was released about one or two years back, it couldn't discover the newer versions of firewalls, then we had to upgrade it."
"For me, there are two things that can make Tufin a bit better... [It needs] a better focus on automation - automating a lot of the processes; and automating rule re-certification, or at least finding a way to simplify it."
"It took a long time just to try to gather the information. I would like Tufin to be faster."
"There were some hiccups here and there with the initial setup, but we used Tufin's support to assist us with that."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is about a $100 per year for an ASA 5506 firewall, and from there it keeps going up if you have a bigger box. For example, the 5516 is $200 to $300 per year."
"If you compare to what is available on the market, they are in the same range with respect to pricing."
"I work with a lot of clients, and the price or value of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator can vary from one client to another. If you have a lot of Cisco solutions, the price of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator is justified. Whereas if you have some security components from other vendors, such as Check Point or Palo Alto. This solution would be a pretty expensive proposition considering that they don't integrate with them well."
"After our free trial was done we got a subscription for three years and it was under $3,000 or so. It's part of the EA we already paid for, so I don't know what it would be if it was a la carte."
"It's around £500 per unit for a three-year license."
"It is covered under the CIsco Enterprise License Agreement (ELA). So, it is licensed and ours."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The licensing costs are around $250,000 to $300,000."
"Our licensing costs are three million total and then we pay for maintenance, which is an additional cost for three years."
"We have seen ROI in operational aspects, in terms of how long it takes to resolve incidences which arise."
"I believe our cost is more than $100,000 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.."
"The price of Tufin could be lower."
"Because we're quite a large company, the price wasn't too much of a factor for us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
6%
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 Business6
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise153
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up. Additionally, I suggest impro...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes.
What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Those who want to use Cisco Defense Orchestrator should build their own use case and see if it fits their environment. The most significant benefit for us is the response time because it automates ...
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

Cisco Defense Orchestrator, CDO
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Insurance Company of British Columbia, Shawmut
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 Cisco Security Cloud Control vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.