We performed a comparison between AlgoSec and Tufin based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Although the setup and support could use some improvement for both solutions, the easy integration with widely used firewalls put AlgoSec slightly ahead of Tufin.
"We met our goal by gaining visibility and automating rule creation."
"AlgoSec has definitely helped to improve the process of auditing all firewall rules and access."
"We have reduced the attack surface of risky rules, improved our compliance scores, and streamlined our firewall change flow all thanks to AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer."
"The most valuable feature is the Firewall Analyser, which has a number of fantastic features."
"It has reduced the workload for the firewall team thanks to the API integration with our ticketing system, handling the standard types of requests automatically."
"I like that the firewall will analyze the tools within the risk profiles and the policy optimizations within the AFA. This can also be used to create reports for the customer with the risk profiles to optimize the firewall rules."
"The most valuable features are the FW report, traffic simulation, and the FireFlow system to help manage requests."
"It has reduced our audit preparation efforts and costs drastically and maintains continuous compliance."
"Valuable features include a central pane of management for all the firewalls and the ability to do queries on the rules and understand in which files the rules are configured."
"In our current environment, the most valuable feature from Tufin is their Network Map."
"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."
"It has helped us to meet our compliance mandates. We have some requirements that we need to provide more visibility on the risk levels of our firewall base and Tufin helped us with that requirement."
"We are able to stay compliant with many of the regulations."
"The most valuable feature is alerting, which lets me know when someone has made a change."
"The APIs are the most valuable feature of this solution, as they facilitate integration with ServiceNow and other solutions."
"It's user-friendly. It's easy to understand menus on the web GUI. That's a good feature for us. I can say that it's doing what it's supposed to do. It also integrates well with other products like Check Point."
"We are using AlgoSec directly against our Cisco Firepower. At first, AlgoSec didn't work with Firepower. It didn't know how to read the logs. So, improvement has been made. Now, the feature that was available on the older generation firewall is available on the current one, but this is a problem which has already been dealt with."
"It needs support for its cloud-based solution."
"The FireFlow's out-of-the-box workflow configuration/customization wizard could be improved to be more user-friendly and have a shorter learning curve."
"We don't dare push the new policy automatically, We don't have confidence in this feature."
"The reporting could be a bit better."
"ABF is not very mature compare to AFA and AFF, but the module and concepts are quite good. I would suggest more concentration on ABF, especially on object and application permissions."
"Needs better technical support and quicker response times."
"The initial setup can be complex for beginners."
"I think that the interface could be cleaner, and easier to use."
"Their pricing can be better. It is not very transparent."
"A limitation right now for compressed firewalls is the limited ability to see above a site level in terms of the Topology Mapping in the policy display. While Tufin's actively working on a solution, or at least they have this in the queue, from being able to view this on a higher level and how all of our site networks are connected, this ability would be useful, as we expect to have these compressed firewalls in place for quite some time."
"The network part of the solution could be improved. It's too hard because of the Tufin licensing model for the routing devices."
"In the next release I would like to see better migration in the Cloud because that will allow more visibility in the network."
"The firewall management is complex for beginners."
"The older version that we have doesn't support some newer firewall vendors."
"My worry with Tufin is that it cannot connect to Fortinet, which is what I want to do."
AlgoSec is ranked 1st in Firewall Security Management with 173 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. AlgoSec is rated 9.0, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AlgoSec writes "Helps identify risks, reduce attack surfaces, and streamline policy changes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". AlgoSec is most compared with FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Fortinet FortiManager, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Cisco Defense Orchestrator. See our AlgoSec 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.
