Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Tenable Security Center vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (17th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (1st)
Tenable Security Center
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (10th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (3rd)
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
182
Ranking in other categories
Firewall Security Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tenable Security Center8.9%
Qualys VMDR15.1%
Rapid7 InsightVM13.0%
Other63.0%
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
Firewall Security Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tufin Orchestration Suite22.5%
AlgoSec22.2%
FireMon Security Manager17.6%
Other37.699999999999996%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
OndrejKOVAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Empower clients with risk-based vulnerability management through continuous workflow and valuable insights
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages. Additionally, the licensing model could be more flexible for managed security providers, similar to a pay-as-you-go model.
MithatBulut - PeerSpot reviewer
New employees can quickly grasp the various IPs, devices, and the network's logical and physical
Tufin is primarily used to orchestrate and manage network traffic and firewall devices. It is specifically useful for implementing firewall policies and handling requests from clients that require policy updates or changes Tufin simplifies understanding network topology. New employees can quickly…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Overall, we have seen about eighty-seven percent reduction of the number of vulnerabilities that require urgency to remediate, specifically the number of criticals."
"Tenable is the leading product for vulnerability scanning."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"The solution is one of the most, if not the most, stable product available."
"Tenable's most valuable features are the credential scan, vulnerability reports, and vulnerability ratings (VPR)."
"We use Tenable to scan all of our environments and plugins for vulnerabilities. Tenable helps us discover network vulnerabilities to threats and piracy."
"It allows financial institutions to compare their vulnerability management to others in the same sector."
"Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports."
"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."
"It provides very good reports. It can easily integrate with multiple firewalls, such as Cisco, Juniper, Palo Alto, and Checkpoint. We can push a policy from Tufin to a firewall, which is a very good feature. We can monitor all access rules and the operating system of a firewall."
"Tufin Orchestration Suite is a good tool that makes firewall policies faster to implement from a central point, and its support is good."
"The most valuable feature are role and objects usage for individual objects and app usage."
"The technical support is pretty good."
"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."
"We use this product to sharpen our change cycle. A request used to take quite a while as we did manual assessments. A lot of that is now done through SecureTrack."
"It is very easy to use. We can get results back quickly."
"The solution is quite scalable."
 

Cons

"I think the ability to have some enhanced reporting capabilities is something they can improve on, as they have good reports but we have asked for some specific reporting enhancements."
"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."
"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"The dashboard templates are limited."
"Tenable SC can improve by adding more integrations with HCI-type tools and more accurate vulnerability detection."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"The solution needs to improve its support. I would like to see a bird's eye view of my network architecture. I would also like to see the continuous view feature in the tool."
"Security can always be improved."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"The solution is expensive."
"Tenable SC could be improved with additional connectivity to external company postures and the capability of managing and sustaining agents in the systems directly without additional platforms in the middle."
"They are sort of at the pilot stage on some of their products. I saw the Orca and Iris products yesterday. My initial impression of these products were that they were good products, but I felt like some of their features overlapped with SecureTrack and SecureChange, which they are already doing. So, I just wondered what direction they're going in? I understand that they are cloud products, but are these security products going to overlap each other's features at some point? This is my initial concern."
"This solution would benefit from better reporting functionality with graphing so that reports can be presented to management."
"The topology needs improvement. If I click on the network tab, I can go get a cup of coffee, come back, and my topology is still not painted. Maybe, it's just because we have so many devices, but looking at the topology, it is too slow. The problem is that when I click on the network tab, I do not want to see the topology. I want to click on the "Next" button, so I can put in the source and destination, so I can see the path. However, I still have to sit there and wait for the topology to load, and it's frustrating. I'll click on topology and try to click that "Next" button in time to where I can get around it. But, typically, you have to wait for that topology to paint. When it paints it, it's just a bunch of black smudges because there is just so much there. It can't paint it to where you see something. I can always zoom out, or something like that, but it's really worthless."
"When it comes to web services, in my experience, Tomcat has always gone down; after a certain amount of load it breaks down and we have to get things restored again."
"They need to offer more support to vendors, such as Cisco, Checkpoint, Fortinet, and Forcepoint."
"I would like something that addresses security in the cloud."
"The reporting function could improve in Tufin. For our clients with companies that have strong compliance, reporting privacy data is mostly a problem. In the IT department, private data needs a function that one person can analyze it. It requires multiple people to analyze the data."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Costing is pretty reasonable compared to the competition."
"The price can start at €10,000 ($13,000 USD) for between 500 and 1,000 assets, and the price can climb into the millions as more assets are added."
"Though reasonable, the main competitor of Tenable SC, Rapid7, offers a more aggressive and better priced product."
"The licensing costs for this solution are approximately $100,000 US, and I think that covers everything."
"We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."
"Compared to other companies or other products it could maybe be a little bit less, but the price is okay. I would say it's not very expensive."
"It is a bit expensive. Everything is included in the license."
"The tool provides competitive pricing."
"This solution helped us to reduce the time it takes to make changes. We used to spend up to an hour to do a change, and now, it's around five minutes."
"Our licensing costs are three million total and then we pay for maintenance, which is an additional cost for three years."
"The price is on the cheaper side."
"Our evaluation showed that Tufin's features were on par with AlgoSec, but Tufin was the better financial choice."
"Its price is reasonable, but it could be lower. It has been cost-effective for us. We have a contract for three years."
"The solution is more reasonably priced than its competitors."
"For us it's around $40,000 or so."
"Our licensing fees are approximately $100,000 USD yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
872,837 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise26
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise152
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
Since we stood Zafran Security up in our private cloud, we handle the maintenance on our side. As we opted not to use...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
In terms of areas for improvement, Zafran Security is doing a really great job as a new and emerging company. Oftenti...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
My use cases for Zafran Security revolve around two primary areas. One is around vulnerability management and priorit...
What do you like most about Tenable SC?
The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
The price of Tenable Security Center is not so high; it's relatively a cheaper solution.
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
The reason for rating it an eight out of ten is that the initial setup could be easier; the setup is rather difficult...
What needs improvement with Tufin SecureCloud?
Tufin Orchestration Suite ( /products/tufin-orchestration-suite-reviews ) is not commonly used in Thailand due to a l...
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 compi...
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 ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
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 Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: October 2025.
872,837 professionals have used our research since 2012.