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.
"The user-friendliness, visibility, compliance and efficiency are unparalleled in the industry."
"AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer can detect misconfigurations and unused or permissive rules, as well as rules without logging. Through a single dashboard, I can see all the problematic rules from all the firewalls. It's very simple, with AlgoSec, to get an analysis of all the rules, and that helps with visibility."
"AlgoSec is able to provide a consistent view into all of an organization's firewalls, regardless if the management is done by different companies."
"It helps us to streamline our firewall rules, identify risks, and provide better visibility. This product has significantly saved the time and human efforts in creating and deploying firewall rules. It is now easier for our cybersecurity team to analyze firewalls rules and ACLs, using them in a more efficient manner."
"It can be easily integrated with different firewall devices (even different brands and models)."
"It helps in regulatory compliance metrics and overall firewall security optimization."
"There are some important and really nice features that I want to mention about AlgoSec. The most useful feature is instantaneous AFA reports, that you do not have to wait (at least one week or even more for a more accurate one) to get optimization recommendations about policy as many other vendors."
"The features that I like are the monitoring and the alerts. It provides real-time monitoring, or at least close to real-time. I think that is important. I like its way of organizing, also. It is pretty clear. I also like their reporting structure - the way we can use AlgoSec to clear a rule base, like covering and hiding rules."
"The most valuable feature are role and objects usage for individual objects and app usage."
"I like the fact that Tufin was able to integrate with our firewalls, which include Palo Alto and FortiGate."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of our risk poster in our firewall."
"It is an important application for controlling and monitoring firewall rules. It is useful for making and monitoring the changes."
"This has helped us to better clean up and audit changes to the firewall policy."
"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."
"The solution helps us meet our compliance needs."
"I had been impressed with the depth of capabilities within SecureTrack, particularly, in terms of generating insights for a user and firewall operator. With SecureTrack, I've been impressed with the level of flexibility with workflow design and its ability to generate different work streams and flows through the tool that are customized for our organization processes."
"Advanced analytics and reporting capabilities that provide deeper insights into network traffic, security policy effectiveness, compliance, and risk management can be beneficial."
"While AlgoSec provides comprehensive visibility and management of security policies across hybrid environments, there is an opportunity to further expand its intelligence capabilities."
"The risk matrix implementation is not easy from an Excel file, so it would be nice to have a solution for creating it directly within the web interface."
"There could be certain improvements such as supporting secure email."
"AlgoSec can probably do better at introducing features for the cloud firewall scenarios. This is something that will probably help customers. It needs a hybrid scenario that includes private cloud, public cloud, and on-prem things. If a feature could cover all three different types of deployment, that could probably make it even more desirable for clients."
"This solution would be improved if it were able to compare configurations and provide recommendations."
"It doesn't support all features on our firewalls. For instance, planning changes, which include net rules, doesn't work. It didn't integrate so well with the ACI network."
"Certain firewalls don't integrate with AlgoSec, and it would be great if this bug could be fixed."
"The metrics need improvement. They need more consistency or understanding of automation, along lines of customization of automation."
"In the next release I would like to see better migration in the Cloud because that will allow more visibility in the network."
"The change workflow process is getting better. I wish it was a little more customizable. Right now, my biggest issue is that it wants to optimize everything we put in. Sometimes, we need a rule to be more readable, and we want it to go in a specific way. Sometimes, it's difficult to get Tufin to accept that. It wants to optimize and reduce the number of ACLs. On the compliance side, sometimes you just want more ACLs, so it's more readable for an auditor."
"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."
"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."
"The change impact analysis doesn't even get close to actually solving our problems. I am not impressed with it."
"I would like easier integration with more automation."
"I would like to see AI elements included with this solution."
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.
