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 most valuable feature is the unused rule optimization, where it clears the policy when appropriate."
"The most valuable feature is the Firewall Analyser, which has a number of fantastic features."
"ABF is a wonderful module where you can keep the footprint for your firewall rules up-to-date, like CMDB."
"I found that for policy optimization it does a great job."
"Detection of malicious activities and malware is much better than other options."
"ActiveChange integrates with your change workflow and ticketing system. For example, a change request is made to open port 8080. Then, if the guy who was supposed to implement that change mistakenly opened port 80, then ActiveChange will say, "What was approved was 8080, but what you actually opened was 80." That actually helps to fix human errors. It helps to check everything that is being done. You can go through the analysis and see changes that were made, and AlgoSec is able to alert you immediately. Whenever there is a change, notifications are sent to the administrators because it gives you that real-time alerting and change."
"FireFlow is great. In a company that gets a large volume of requests to open firewall rules, it's helpful to have one place that summarizes the requests, enabling you to clearly understand why they need to be implemented and also implement them. Firewall Analyzer can help you identify missing routing or check information on the firewall without the need to log into a firewall or router to check the routing. We have all that access in three clicks."
"It assists in provisioning the application rapidly, which increases the organization's revenue."
"One of the things that came up this week was the ability to decommission a server, which we thought was interesting. We had a workshop recently that talked about all the things that need to be thought about when managing firewalls. People said, "A lot of times, things get forgotten when you are decommissioning a server." E.g., making sure rules are taken away and taking out the rule set. The fact that there is an automated workload for that can be helpful."
"You can easily scale the solution if you need to."
"We use Tufin to clean up our firewall policies because it is so fast. A report about compliance and the clean-up process used to take about one month up before. With Tufin, it takes only one day."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of our risk poster in our firewall."
"One of the biggest quick wins that we had with Tufin was cleaning up our firewall policies and rules. We cleaned out a lot of rules which helped our devices, longevity-wise, as well as speed-wise."
"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."
"It is extremely scalable. It really addresses the scale of a company's firewall footprint."
"Due to the fact that AlgoSec's user interface is less friendly than that of other programs, it might not be appropriate for persons with little experience in security or IT."
"I would like to be able to see what objects have the same IP, but different names in different firewalls."
"The Firewall Analyzer module can be improved to implement a vulnerability management solution, or they can link Firewall Analyzer with a vulnerability management solution in order to get a better overview of what's going on in our network in terms of vulnerabilities."
"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."
"More scope for editing alerts would be a welcome change."
"The initial setup was extremely complex due to our large environment."
"The risky rules reporting should have more information available in the risky rules report - especially when you export the data into a .CSV format. .CSV format being a text-based visualization, some information and formatting cause the reports to lose meaning and only become just another character in the file since it cannot port over some properties (like severity represented by colors)."
"Support can be improved as there are time delays for resolutions."
"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."
"They need to offer more support to vendors, such as Cisco, Checkpoint, Fortinet, and Forcepoint."
"We would like better communication on tickets, a better way to do metrics, and better communication to the customer. The biggest change that my team would like right now is communication on the process of the ticket, so the customer knows where their ticket is while their waiting."
"Lacks ability to create a Terraform that would enable deployment without manual steps."
"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."
"I would like to see the setup of the Unified Security Policy simplified."
"I would like the application to have faster response times. E.g., the dashboard may take up to two minutes to load. Or, when we do the topology seating its two and a half hours. I would like to get those times down and increase the efficiency of the product there."
"I would like something that addresses security in the cloud."
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.
