We performed a comparison between RedSeal and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management."The most valuable features are network mapping and configuration."
"This is the only solution in the world that gives you a digital resilience score."
"RedSeal integrates the network and gives us a visual or graphical overview of our network. If an organization is geographically dispersed, for instance, with one office in Canada and one office in the Philippines, the whole network, including all devices, is integrated into RedSeal, and you can see from where the traffic is going in and out."
"The product streamlines our change management process."
"The most valuable features are the Security Risks and Best Practices reporting/Rule base cleanup."
"Tufin assists us in maintaining a robust view of our internal network topology."
"The designer gives the ability to know where to add a rule, or if the rule is already in place."
"The technical support is pretty good."
"The visibility is very good. We have managers who are overseeing it, and they are approving things through it."
"The solution is quite scalable."
"In our current environment, the most valuable feature from Tufin is their Network Map."
"The dashboard should be improved to make correlating data easier to do."
"One of the areas of concern is the GUI. It is important to our customers that the GUI looks beautiful. It's a Java Client, so you have a Java dependency."
"Sometimes, it required us to refresh the configuration. When we integrated any of the configurations into the device, sometimes, it could not detect the exact picture of that device. So, we had to reset the device to see that if it was giving true-positive results or false-positive results. In some cases, we were not able to get true-positive results. There was some kind of bug in that version. Its interface is not user-friendly and needs to be improved. It takes time to understand the interface and various options. Skybox has quite a user-friendly interface. They could provide a feature for compliance audit policy if it is already not there. A compliance audit policy ensures that all configurations are based on the best practices standards, such as CIS benchmarks standard or other similar standards. It provides visibility about whether your device configuration is based on best practices or not. Usually, such a feature is provided by other solutions such as Meteor or Tenable Nessus."
"It needs better reporting with more graphics and more pie charts, so management can understand details. The reports that are done now are full of data and management would like to have an image to help understand, right away, what the reports are saying."
"We want to have the ability for a ticket requester to add somebody, or to give somebody view rights to their ticket."
"I would really like to see a new UI for SecureChange. SecureTrack 2.0 has quite an improvement in the UI and it flows more smoothly. The current SecureTrack and SecureChange are a little blocky, and sometimes loading a tab or a page is required to refresh information. Whereas in SecureTrack 2.0, they're starting to improve on that."
"I would like to see API access into every aspect of Tufin."
"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."
"The product should integrate with the UTM features."
"I would rate their reports as a four out of ten. I don't like the way that they are shown. It is too hard to export and send them to our clients."
"For me, there are two things that can make Tufin a bit better... [It needs] a better focus on automation - automating a lot of the processes; and automating rule re-certification, or at least finding a way to simplify it."
Earn 20 points
RedSeal is ranked 21st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. RedSeal is rated 8.2, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of RedSeal writes "Provides a graphical overview of our network and is easy to deploy, but needs a user-friendly interface and a feature for compliance audit policy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". RedSeal is most compared with AlgoSec, Skybox Security Suite, FireMon Security Manager and Ekahau Site Survey, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and AWS Firewall Manager.
We monitor all Risk-Based Vulnerability 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.
