We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks Panorama 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."Overall, the functionality was very good."
"We use the solution for centralized monitoring."
"It allows administrators to manage all firewalls from a single interface, reducing the time and effort required for configuration."
"Compared to all of the other firewall vendors, Palo Alto is very secure."
"The initial setup isn't very complex, it's user-friendly."
"A valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is reporting because it gives you different reports on data, logs, and threats. I also like the centralized firewall management feature of the product."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is its ease of use."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama is stable."
"Visibility is its largest and most valuable feature. You can see everything or all the devices on the network for each customer. It provides you a larger view of what might be wrong with the network and how you can improve it with firewall rules, etc. If you are talking about secure change, being able to automate the entire change process is pretty much the winner for us. It is going to really reduce the time that it takes for us to do changes, and we can just go out and get more customers."
"I like the policy topology map, which allows us to visualize the picture of the security policy of the whole organization."
"SecureChange makes our lives easier with automation."
"We are able to stay compliant with many of the regulations."
"They have very good responses regarding integration and internalization with open tickets."
"The most valuable features are the GUI interface and the API."
"The features I have found most valuable are its capability to check on the firewall and the routers. Afterwards it checks out all the configs, checks the vulnerabilities, checks the risks - it checks everything that may end up causing our router to be compromised. At the end it recommendations what we should do."
"I like the deployment and management of this solution."
"The solution is extremely expensive. You can integrate it with other Palo Alto products, however, it ends up being too much."
"We had some challenges with the initial setup, but it was more on a learning curve basis."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"The current documentation is not detailed enough."
"The pricing is quite high."
"They can improve its cloud integration."
"There is room for improvement in the integration within endpoint detection. They need to do some integration between endpoints and the firewalls."
"The solution could improve by having a true single pane of glass environment for unified management. At the present time, you still have to use three or four different solutions to bring everything together."
"I would like to see more configuration options on next-generation firewalls, defining possible standards for devices."
"The pricing could be a bit more competitive."
"The network part of the solution could be improved. It's too hard because of the Tufin licensing model for the routing devices."
"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."
"There are things that could be explained a little better for somebody brand new to this system, which could be helpful, especially if it was in real-time while you were working in the system. Having the ability in real-time to be able to understand search query suggestions would be helpful."
"There were some hiccups here and there with the initial setup."
"We would like to see more in terms of integration with other application types within the context, such as next-generation firewalls or next-generation threat devices that are out there."
"The initial setup was complex. We have a big environment which contributed to the setup's complexity."
Palo Alto Networks Panorama is ranked 3rd in Firewall Security Management with 80 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 2nd in Firewall Security Management with 180 reviews. Palo Alto Networks Panorama is rated 8.4, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama writes "Built-in proxy with the ability to maintain your own policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Palo Alto Networks Panorama is most compared with AWS Firewall Manager, AlgoSec, Fortinet FortiGate Cloud, FireMon Security Manager and Skybox Security Suite, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer and Cisco Defense Orchestrator. See our Palo Alto Networks Panorama 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.
