We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall 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."It is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
"The tool's support is good."
"It is very easy to use. We can get results back quickly."
"The change workflow process is very easy to customize. You can do a workflow however you want, so you can have an approval every single step. Or, you can remove approvals on certain steps, automating some steps."
"The change workflow process is flexible and customizable. We have one guy who has never logged into Tufin ever in his life. He sits down and in 30 minutes had written an automation routine, then went back and changed it. He did that with no training. For me, that is a major benefit."
"One of the main things is to look at what policies haven't been hit, so we can remove those remnant policies when people come in, use it, and it's still left on the Check Point. So when a couple of users say, "This is not needed anymore." We'll remove it."
"The product is good at auditing the changes that we make in our environment."
"The Topology Map, which feeds into our SecureChange - the latter being an automation platform - there's a lot of synergy between the two."
"We use Tufin to clean up our firewall policies. This makes it a lot easier to find out the things that are wrong."
"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."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"The tool's security features need to improve. It needs also to include a monitoring system for logs. It is also complicated to find a query on the Azure firewall."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."
"There should be a simple one-click deployment for a firewall, rather than a set of setup instructions that include steps such as the DNS configuration, et cetera."
"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."
"A big improvement would be on the USP policy. If we could use Palo Alto to take those zone names and auto import them into the policy, then just do the policy based on the zone names instead of having to put in every single subnet."
"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."
"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."
"One feature that is missing is the ability to assign a step in the workflow to a specific user at a specific time, based on how the previous steps of the workflow have been handled."
"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."
"The two main negative points with Tufin Orca are the absence of full support and that accommodation of files and tools is not provided in a good way."
"There is room for improvement in the speed of Tufin. It is using so many of my VM resources and yet it is still a bit slow... Even though we are allocating 130 gigs of RAM, we still have to wait for a few minutes for a single report to be generated. Otherwise it would be a perfect tool."
Azure Firewall Manager is ranked 12th in Firewall Security Management with 5 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. Azure Firewall Manager is rated 7.8, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall Manager writes "Useful testing, simple configuration, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Azure Firewall Manager is most compared with Azure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks Panorama, AWS Firewall Manager, FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF) and Skybox Security Suite, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and AWS Firewall Manager. See our Azure Firewall 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.