We performed a comparison between RedSeal and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management."This is the only solution in the world that gives you a digital resilience score."
"The most valuable features are network mapping and configuration."
"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."
"It allows administrators to visualize the traffic flow, and troubleshoot when necessary."
"Our engineers are spending less time on manual processes, specifically for the reporting functionality. For doing the rule cleanup and policy analysis, it would be a nightmare to do that manually. So, it is saving our engineering teams time from not having to do manual log reviews."
"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."
"I like the policy topology map, which allows us to visualize the picture of the security policy of the whole organization."
"SecureChange makes our lives easier with automation."
"Policy management and the cartography of the network have been the most valuable features."
"In our current environment, the most valuable feature from Tufin is their Network Map."
"It provides a great visibility around the roots: Root implementing which can be done, roots that have changed, and what has been done. So, it's pretty useful when you have an audit going on."
"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."
"The dashboard should be improved to make correlating data easier to do."
"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."
"I would rate their reports as a four out of ten. I don't like the way that they are shown. It is too hard to export and send them to our clients."
"There was some complexity during the initial setup"
"The product should integrate with the UTM features."
"I would like to see API access into every aspect of Tufin."
"I would like the ability to export information in other formats including PDF, HTML, or Excel."
"I would like to see visibility into the FW features like IPS/Content Filter policies, the same way it does for FW rules/policies."
"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."
"There are at least two things that need improvement. One is the business workflow and the second is the integration with logging solutions."
Earn 20 points
RedSeal is ranked 20th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. RedSeal is rated 8.2, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of RedSeal writes "Provides a graphical overview of our network and is easy to deploy, but needs a user-friendly interface and a feature for compliance audit policy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". RedSeal is most compared with Skybox Security Suite, AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Ekahau Site Survey and iBwave Wi-Fi, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Azure Firewall Manager.
We monitor all Risk-Based Vulnerability 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.
