We performed a comparison between FireMon Security Manager 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.
"Policy test, access path analysis, and change reports."
"The unused objects is another nice feature, where it digs a little bit deeper into comparing the logs that it sees versus the configurations that it sees... The unused objects feature will go through in a pretty detailed way and show us which ones aren't being used. Or, if they are used, it will show us how often they're used."
"Firewall auditing is very important. We also use the solution for rule traffic analysis, traffic flow discovery and hidden/shadow rules within over 100 firewalls spanning five different brands."
"I've been using the reports to see what is going on, and that is a helpful feature. We can track down unused rules, which helps with compliance. We can see rules that have not been used or that are duplicates or overly permissive."
"The SQL language is convenient to use. It allows us to process a bunch of criteria very quickly and narrows things down if there is an issue with the firewall. It's easy to do that with SQL queries."
"The most valuable feature is that everything is recorded in the historical logs, including the firewall rules, headcounts, object-level usage, and the rule documentation. The rule certification details are also there, which means that someone can be held accountable for a specific firewall rule."
"It is a good product. Previously, we were using only spreadsheets to compare the usage, but now with FireMon, we are able to clean up or review the policies to some extent. It is still a work in progress, but we are at a good stage now."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting capability because everything that we do is a result of our being able to query a report, based on our environment and our PCI compliance efforts."
"The time that we require to makes changes has been reduced from weeks to days."
"Being able to customize your own clarity to that aspect of change management."
"It provides a comprehensive overview of what our network looks like in terms of what is allowed and what is not, then how the traffic' is flowing with the Network Topology Map."
"It provides very good reports. It can easily integrate with multiple firewalls, such as Cisco, Juniper, Palo Alto, and Checkpoint. We can push a policy from Tufin to a firewall, which is a very good feature. We can monitor all access rules and the operating system of a firewall."
"The automated reporting on a regular basis is helping us to be compliant with legal requirements."
"It provides a great visibility around the roots: Root implementing which can be done, roots that have changed, and what has been done. So, it's pretty useful when you have an audit going on."
"The most valuable feature of Tufin is rule analysis."
"It is very easy to use. We can get results back quickly."
"The AWS integration is still not mature for us to use. It is just not ready for our use case for AWS connectivity. Therefore, it does not provide us with a single pane of glass for our cloud environments, because we can't manage our cloud environment with the tool."
"Policy Planner requirements section is good, but could use some improvement to allow flexibility to enter different types of requests (modifying an existing policy, object or service group, for example) in a structured task format that can be auto-verified."
"It comes as a Linux appliance on a server and we're not a Linux shop, we're more of a Windows shop. It would be great if they could automate or integrate the backups into it and other things through their GUI interface, just to make the management of Linux a little more transparent."
"We've had recurring issues managing FireMon's internal backups. Sometimes, the space allocated for the backup is full, and there is no process where it deletes files that are older than I certain date. It's just waiting for the storage to get full and then it's cleaned up. It isn't something that creates serious issues for us."
"The current health and monitoring of the devices is atrocious... Imagine you have a list of 200 devices, and you can grade each of those devices as either green, yellow, or red. However, there might be three different reasons for you to go to red, or eight different reasons to go to yellow, and all of those things could be combined... Out of all those categories, I only find one or two of them that are, perhaps, pertinent."
"To my knowledge, there's no cloud component to FireMon whatsoever. We're on the hook for any updates to versioning of the operating system or the application that runs on the operating system. It would be nice if it was a little bit more automated."
"When it comes to identifying risk in our environment and prioritizing fixes, it is really about the different priorities within the organization. FireMon is not so smart that it can tell what's important to us. It's up to us to figure that out."
"FireMon could improve its end-user practices. As an end user, I am just trying to catch up on all the alerts. There are so many, and you still have to go through them and document what was found."
"I wish there was a read-only admin option. I don't like that you have to be a full admin just to see the Network Topology Map. That option is great out there if you are a user, multi-domain user, etc. However, that piece is very helpful for us, but I also don't want to be handing out admin access to every single person so they can see that network tab."
"I would like to see them get rid of the REST APIs and use something more modern."
"I would like to see visibility into the FW features like IPS/Content Filter policies, the same way it does for FW rules/policies."
"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 feel that the user interface is a bit dated."
"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 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."
"There was some complexity during the initial setup"
FireMon Security Manager is ranked 4th in Firewall Security Management with 53 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. FireMon Security Manager is rated 8.2, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of FireMon Security Manager writes "Makes compliance much easier compared to doing it manually, and automates policy changes across environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". FireMon Security Manager is most compared with AlgoSec, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and RedSeal, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Cisco Defense Orchestrator. See our FireMon Security Manager 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.
