Cisco Defense Orchestrator vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco Logo
1,059 views|319 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Tufin Logo
11,923 views|6,941 comparisons
91% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco Defense Orchestrator and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Firewall Security Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Defense Orchestrator vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"With Cisco Defense Orchestrator, we can manage the complete Cisco Security solution. It provides a simple and centralized way to manage all products.""The most valuable feature is being able to do centralized upgrades on the ASAs. We can select all of those ASAs, and say, "Upgrade these ASAs at this scheduled time." It will copy down the ASA image, ASDM image, and then do the upgrade and failovers, and then put it all back into service as required at a scheduled time. It automates that process for us.""We have quite a few Active Stone by pairs. If they fail over... I'll see that there's a change on it and I'll have a look. The only change on it is that now this one is the standby, it took over the active role. I can go into that firewall and find out what happened... and troubleshoot based on that. That's pretty cool too.""Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users.""The ability to see the uptimes on the different VPNs that we have configured for site-to-site.""The initial setup was straightforward. We spun up the VM onsite. We generated the key that it needed to talk to the Cloud Orchestrator. After that, as I started adding devices, it was relatively quick and easy.""The bulk changes feature is definitely the most valuable.""We use a lot of image upgrades. We take some 20 devices and then we update everything at once, including the policies. We apply policies for groups. For certain groups, like anti-viruses, we send out policies and apply them to every single device. It's really easy and simple."

More Cisco Defense Orchestrator Pros →

"This has helped us to better clean up and audit changes to the firewall policy.""The designer gives the ability to know where to add a rule, or if the rule is already in place.""The stability is bulletproof.""The most valuable feature of Tufin is rule analysis.""Our engineers save quite a bit of time that was previously spent on manual processes.""The initial setup was straightforward.""We are using the visibility with notifications on every firewall change and what those changes were. We have visibility to see who is making the changes, and when.""This solution has helped our clients because it allows them to leverage the tools so that they can actually reduce their overall expenses for the environment."

More Tufin Orchestration Suite Pros →

Cons
"They need to work on the user interface. It needs to be improved to make it more user-friendly.""They can centralize all products and provide a correlation about an incident and the response. They can also provide an on-premises solution. Currently, Cisco Defense Orchestrator is just for cloud deployments, not for on-premises deployments. Customers have to manage it on the cloud. We are based in Vietnam, and most of the customers here prefer to have on-premises deployments. Customers, especially from banking and government sectors, do not prefer to do anything on the cloud. Some of the small enterprises use the cloud.""I'd like CDO to be the one-stop-shop where we could do all the configurations easily. It would be nice, for ASA upgrades, if we could do them from a central repository and not have to reach out to Cisco. That would be a definite plus.""It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances.""The dashboard needs to be more customizable to provide better reporting for our network.""I've found dozens of bugs over the year we've been using it. The more I use it for different things, the more problems I find... Most of the problems have to do with the user interface. A lot of thought and work has gone into the back-end component to make the product do what it's intended to do, but the way it is presented for use hasn't gotten nearly as much thought to make it smart and bug-free.""The main thing that would useful for us would the logging and monitoring. I have to check it out, to get the beta, because I don't have access to them... I wanted CDO to be a central place so where I could do everything but right now I don't think that's possible. I really don't want to go back and forth between this and FMC. Maybe the logging portion, when I look at it, will give me some similarities.""Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components."

More Cisco Defense Orchestrator Cons →

"I would like to see visibility into the FW features like IPS/Content Filter policies, the same way it does for FW rules/policies.""The firewall management is complex for beginners.""They've got such a large number of APIs, and it is so easy to use their APIs. Effectively, they allow us to use it with anything. The only way to improve it more is by offering support for implementing their APIs into certain hardware or software that we might use. They can provide support for implementing APIs.""One of the areas that I've had challenges with is making complicated reports.""The reports could be easier to read and more customizable. Also, capturing some of the different versions, and being able to dig through them could be a bit better.""We have had a couple issues with the VMs, but I think it was just because they were starving for resources. A recommendation on what the virtual appliances should have for resources would be appreciated.""I haven't seen the cloud integration yet, and I would like to see if we could audit the cloud firewalls, like the cloud-native, Azure, and Amazon. That would be nice. You want one tool to do everything. I don't want to use another tool, or manually go and audit the cloud firewalls.""We like the change impact analysis capabilities quite a bit. The only weakness is that the reporting is a bit clunky. We would like to have the reporting be better."

More Tufin Orchestration Suite Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is about a $100 per year for an ASA 5506 firewall, and from there it keeps going up if you have a bigger box. For example, the 5516 is $200 to $300 per year."
  • "It's around £500 per unit for a three-year license."
  • "After our free trial was done we got a subscription for three years and it was under $3,000 or so. It's part of the EA we already paid for, so I don't know what it would be if it was a la carte."
  • "It is covered under the CIsco Enterprise License Agreement (ELA). So, it is licensed and ours."
  • "If you compare to what is available on the market, they are in the same range with respect to pricing."
  • "I work with a lot of clients, and the price or value of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator can vary from one client to another. If you have a lot of Cisco solutions, the price of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator is justified. Whereas if you have some security components from other vendors, such as Check Point or Palo Alto. This solution would be a pretty expensive proposition considering that they don't integrate with them well."
  • More Cisco Defense Orchestrator Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • "Tufin and AlgoSec were pretty much in the competitive price range, but this one provided us better integration into the Check Point environment."
  • "The solution has helped us to reduce the time it takes to make changes. With Tufin, it takes ten to 15 minutes. Before, it was 30 minutes or more."
  • "The solution has helped reduce the time it takes us to make changes. It helps make overall integrated changes immediately. It allows us to cut down at least a few hours in the week in regards to changes and monitoring."
  • "We've seen a decrease of about 50 percent in the overall time it takes to complete a firewall change."
  • "Tufin makes things a little easier. It lessens the amount of manual work which we have to do. It has a lot of benefits in terms of revenues, profits, employee costs, and operational costs. We have already seen return on investment."
  • "This solution helps us reduce the time it takes us to make changes. We're probably saving time by 25%."
  • "Tufin reduced the time it takes to solve a problem, which reduces the time of the outage."
  • More Tufin Orchestration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of Tufin is security auditing. We are able to check the rules and compliance of the company, for example, what is allowed or not. We are able to check the rules over… more »
    Top Answer:Tuffin is expensive, and we have to explain to our customers the benefit for them to purchase. If we explain the benefits in the correct way they do not mind the price. We typically do costing for the… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    1,059
    Comparisons
    319
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    11,923
    Comparisons
    6,941
    Reviews
    9
    Average Words per Review
    432
    Rating
    7.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    CDO
    Tufin SecureCloud
    Learn More
    Cisco
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Tufin
    Demo Not Available
    Overview

    Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO) is a cloud-based management solution designed to ensure streamlined and consistent security policies across the Cisco security portfolio. Specifically tailored to manage all Cisco Secure Firewall form factors (running either ASA or Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) software), CDO offers real-time visibility and troubleshooting capabilities, effectively enhancing overall network security.

    CDO addresses the challenges of migration, supporting transitions from on-premises to cloud environments and facilitating the shift from ASA to FTD configurations. As organizations embark on their cloud adoption journey, CDO simplifies provisioning workflows for remote branches, reduces operational expenditures related to inventory management, and offers scalability for multi-cloud deployments.

    Tufin enables organizations to automate their security policy visibility, risk management, provisioning and compliance across their multi-vendor, hybrid environment. Customers gain visibility and control across their network, ensure continuous compliance with security standards and embed security enforcement into workflows and development pipelines. 

    Sample Customers
    Insurance Company of British Columbia, Shawmut
    3M, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNP Parabas, ConocoPhillips, Deutsche Bank, GE, IBM, Pfizer, United States Postal Service 
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Manufacturing Company38%
    Computer Software Company13%
    University13%
    Consumer Goods Company13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company44%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Financial Services Firm6%
    Government5%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm26%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Healthcare Company7%
    Insurance Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business43%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise36%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise5%
    Large Enterprise84%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise7%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise69%
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco Defense Orchestrator vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Defense Orchestrator vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cisco Defense Orchestrator is ranked 14th in Firewall Security Management while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. Cisco Defense Orchestrator is rated 8.2, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Defense Orchestrator writes "Provides visibility into entire infrastructure and bulk changes save time and resources". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Cisco Defense Orchestrator is most compared with AlgoSec, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Azure Firewall Manager, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Opinnate. See our Cisco Defense Orchestrator 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.