Tufin Orchestration Suite Reviews

It gives me a unified policy across multiple vendors.

Our work is part of the team that manages all the files and people call to tell me exactly which rules I need to change, and where. Tufin makes this easy and let's me know if it already exists or not.

The one that Tufin knows about - being able to support the routers in multi-vendor environments I think is a known thing, but it doesn't make it any better for what I use it for. That's probably the only thing. To be honest, I know we don't use it to it's full extent. We don't use all files on it so it could do a lot more, but it's our own fault.

I think it's OK. From what I've seen, yeah, it's alright. I don't get involved in the maintenance of the Tufin copies though. I just use it, rather than maintain it.

It struggles a little bit with our internal system.

My impression is it's relatively easy, but I don't know about the first time.

Personally, I have seen some others, but I don't think my company deals with anyone else.

You should do a preview of each solution that you're interested in. Use it first and then decide if you want to buy it. Nowadays it's easy.

Audit compliance. We need the PCI audit compliance and that's what Tufin delivers for us.

Before we'd have to manually go down rule bases three-thousand lines long, rule by rule finding the stuff that's missing. So it saves us a lot of time.

Well there's parts of the product that we can't use, the SecureChange, the network address translation, and users as it's all very difficult, so we've never managed to use it for that. We just use it for PCI and for rule based management, rules that have no hits, and I use it to help with the rule-based.

It's only broken twice in the ten years we've had it, so it's very good.

It scales because you can put multiple devices in multiple networks. We've got some things where the firewalls aren't routable back to the central, so we can put these proxy-serve type things in, so it's very scalable. You can have as many of them as you want.

I've used them only twice. Once for an RFE and once for a little issue that we had. I found them very knowledgeable, and UK based.

We bought Firemon in the interim and then got rid of it and went back exclusively to Tufin. We had a special environment and Firemon came in, took a pitch, and it was cheaper than Tufin and it checked all the boxes. But when it was actually deployed in the network it didn't fit the purpose so we cut our losses.

Very easy. You need Check Point skills for sure, and it goes with other products as well.

No, we didn't. We went straight to Tufin initially because we bought it. There wasn't anything else back then, because we got it ten years ago.

The most valuable feature for us is SecureTrack. With it, we have rule documentation, change documentation, and the ability to create various reports. We can also enforce compliance with our security policy, as well as to define exceptions.

Another valuable feature is SecureChange, which enables us to have individual workflows. Individual workflows have to be followed step-by-step without skipping a step. That's the great thing that we can do with automation so that firewall administrators don't have to do so much manual, routine work.

There's an automatic compliance check. If you have an accessory test from A to B, the system will check the entire firewall infrastructure to see if it's possible immediately or not, and if it's not possible now, then the change will be started, and if it's a standard change, the standard change will be run more or less automatically, and it's not necessary to involve the technical team for a standard change.

The GUI is not really adaptable as you cannot configure it. The buttons are fixed and it's not really intuitive. It's good for selling training, but in daily work, it's not very easy for those who are new at it.

We've had no issues deploying it.

I think the stability is very good. We've had no issues with instability.

It scales from small network segments up to very, very big companies with thousands of firewalls.

Once I heard from a German Tufin guy something about enthusiastic support, and I thought he was crazy. But now, I think it's true. Even when there's standard support, I become nervous when I don't get feedback within one or two hours, even if the SLA says twenty-four hours. They're very responsive, and also very technical. Technically, they're quite good.

It depends, but mostly the initial setup is straightforward. Just install the operating system, take the appliance, install the software, and then connect all the devices you want to monitor, then you have the basis. Maybe it takes some effort to implement or to import unsupported devices, or defining generic devices and so on. But the standard installation is very straightforward and easy.

I don't evaluate other vendors every two weeks, but I've evaluated them before, and I think Tufin is quite a technically-leading solution. It's very robust and Tufin has focused on stability and topology. Correct topology is the main factor for authorization speed, and Tufin is the best.

It's been, from the moment we implemented it, useful for both our security and operations personnel. On a daily basis, the most valuable feature is the integration of different products. We're able to perform and see reports and audits from a single console all in one place.

Tufin should do a better part of educating their users because it's quite complicated. Sometimes it's hard to keep up with all the changes that come quickly. They're improving this, though, but it still needs work for both partners and customers.

I've been using Tufin for over 10 years.

We've had no issues deploying it.

The stability has been perfect. I know it quite well and it's been stable almost from the very beginning. There were some minor technical problems, as with anything, but the developers were responsive and helpful.

The scalability wasn’t good in the past, but now as they've grown as a company, they've changed the platform so that it can scale for its users.

Technical support has been good.

The initial setup, as I remember, was quite easy, but I've been using it for 10 years.

We implemented it with a partner.

It's very easy to document every change that has been done to auditors or internal auditing, but also to troubleshoot when you have more than one person taking care of your policies. So we're able to very easily and very quickly find out what our colleagues did and to mitigate that if it has caused any problems.

It seems to be stuck between the usability of a browser-based application and a full application. Part of my feelings about this have to do with my perception of working with web applications, and there tends to be almost natural laws that something might get stuck or the browser gets confused, things like that which could use some improvement.

We've had no issues with deployment.

I haven't seen any stability issues. We actually seldom see issues with the product, so the experience with the support is not that common, but I think the issues we've seen have been handled quite well.

It scales very easily. I'm in a market where a 5000-user company is a large company, so there's definitely no problem there, but I easily see that the solution can scale far larger than that.

They are responsive and quick in terms of technical support.

The basic installation is very easy and it's quick getting things up and running. Where there tends to be the problem is, and it's not really a Tufin issue but more a customer issue, how to really work through the policies and get the full value of the products. It's very easy to get started, and when you first get started, the further steps where you begin to make your change to your app, there are a lot of organizational work that needs to be done to get the full value of the product. This tends to be the issue with most companies.

We implemented it with our in-house team.

This is true for Tufin and as well for many of the security vendors and their products. I think it's very important just to get started or get the easy wins first, and then go to the solution afterwards. With Tufin, I think it's very, very easy to get big easy wins up front with all the documentation and all the tracking, just to get started and move forward from there.

It supports failure operational processes of the administrator, which sometimes in small companies is difficult to do. This helps me in my job to help others free up time to do other, more important tasks.

The biggest and most important benefit is that it addresses the weaknesses of our internal customers. We can perform changes in real-time instead of having to wait for days or weeks. Of course, if there are compliance issues, we can see right away whether they have documentation that addresses the issues and we can then approach management with the solution.

It doesn't have cross-vendor support for solutions such as Barracuda.

We had no issues with deployment.

We haven't had to log any support cases, so I'd say that it's a stable solution. We haven't had any issues with stability.

Our Austrain customers are not big, so scalability from my point of view is not an issue. At the moment, we haven't come across any issues with scalability, so I'd say it's perfect in that regard.

We aren't in direct contact with technical support, but we could be if necessary. But I've heard my colleagues talk about how Tufin isn't as big a company as Check Point, so that if there's a problem, the entire company helps to find a solution.

I didn't perform the initial setup, but I don't think it was too complex. We have a lot of Check Point engineers and thy have an understanding of security solutions, so it was easy for them. We have all three Tufin solution, and I think SecureApp was the most challenging, but we have experience, so the setup was still not too difficult.

We implemented it with our in-house team.

We have a close relationship with people within Tufin, many of whom came from Check Point. We didn't think about going with another vendor.

Just try it out. You should perform Proof of Concept and you’ll be reaping the benefits and seeing it’s a good product.

The most valuable function of Tufin is that it provides compliance tests on security devices. It gives us a great idea of what is going wrong and what we have to do to improve. Then, when we try to apply the solution to our policies, it provides us help in doing so. It tells us where to put our policy on both the front and back ends, as well as in the configuration files.

The usability and speed of the solution needs improvement. In our experience, it seems a little bit slow.

We've had it in place for more than a year now.

We've had no issues with deployment.

The stability of Tufin has been quite good for us. I have no complains about stability.

Honestly, I don't have too many devices running with Tufin, so we don't really have a need to scale much. But I do think that it needs improvement in the area of scalability.

In our experience, customer service is OK, but the product really doesn't need too much help. It works by itself and is quite stable.

In regards to technical support, we work with our partner's company, so we don't communicate directly with Tufin.

We co-operate with our partner's company, so we do not communicate directly with Tufin support.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The implementation was so simple we did it ourselves without too much help from our partner company, so I can say that it was easy for us to adopt the solution.

Fro my perspective, it's a solution that covered all our needs, so it was an easy choice. It was a bargain at the price point.

For us, it works, so why can't it work for you?

We use SecureTrack to walk us through the implementations of our firewalls and for all our policy checks, complaint checks, and reporting and overview of our monitoring policies.

It's given us an easier workflow since we go through the different steps of network validation to make sure that the request coming from the user is technically sound and implementable. It also helps us with security validation, that is, compliance with company goals and so on. We've also added change management so that we're able to implement solutions at the at the optimal time.

I'd like to see automation of a number of steps. In particular, I think that the implementation and validation steps that we're currently doing manually should be automated. Even the input part at the beginning of our workflow could be automated with a link to our ITSM solution.

Deploying it has been without issues.

I have no instability issues at all. It’s working so well that I’m not worried about it.

We have a number of firewalls with no concerns about scalability.

I have had a number of discussions with mostly the sales team and some engineers on how to go ahead and implement some things. So technical support in that regard has been great.

I wasn’t involved because I wasn’t in with the company at that time. I was involved since April and we had some upgrades to perform. It was straightforward and we had no issues with it.

We've implemented with just our in-house team since the initial setup.

We looked at some other solutions at events, but they are not as advanced or complete as what you get from Tufin.

Give it a try.