We performed a comparison between Tenable.io Container Security and Tufin Orchestration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"It is an important application for controlling and monitoring firewall rules. It is useful for making and monitoring the changes."
"I like the fact that Tufin was able to integrate with our firewalls, which include Palo Alto and FortiGate."
"It allows administrators to visualize the traffic flow, and troubleshoot when necessary."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it reduces both the time required and the number of errors when making changes."
"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 change workflow process is flexible and customizable... If we have a firewall completed and we want to redo it, if we need to re-engineer a particular firewall and open a different destination, we can do that by creating a break-fix... That is one of its useful tools."
"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."
"The reports that this solution provides are very useful."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"The stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
"The biggest area where I see a need for improvement is some of the documentation and training stuff. It does a really good job of hitting the big concepts, but it needs like another layer deeper of actually getting into some of the details of how to do some of the things. Conceptually, I understand how the product works, but now how do I start building stuff and integrating it into my environment."
"Their pricing can be better. It is not very transparent."
"We would like to see automation metrics, from a reporting standpoint. We would also like to see automation of site-to-site VPN tunnels. We would like to see automation of Check Point application-based firewall rules."
"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."
"I think that the interface could be cleaner, and easier to use."
"They've got such a large number of APIs, and it is so easy to use their APIs. Effectively, they allow us to use it with anything. The only way to improve it more is by offering support for implementing their APIs into certain hardware or software that we might use. They can provide support for implementing APIs."
"We found some bugs on the software, but we're working with tech support to fix them."
"The topology needs improvement. If I click on the network tab, I can go get a cup of coffee, come back, and my topology is still not painted. Maybe, it's just because we have so many devices, but looking at the topology, it is too slow. The problem is that when I click on the network tab, I do not want to see the topology. I want to click on the "Next" button, so I can put in the source and destination, so I can see the path. However, I still have to sit there and wait for the topology to load, and it's frustrating. I'll click on topology and try to click that "Next" button in time to where I can get around it. But, typically, you have to wait for that topology to paint. When it paints it, it's just a bunch of black smudges because there is just so much there. It can't paint it to where you see something. I can always zoom out, or something like that, but it's really worthless."
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 21st in Container Security with 7 reviews while Tufin Orchestration Suite is ranked 19th in Container Security with 180 reviews. Tenable.io Container Security is rated 7.8, while Tufin Orchestration Suite is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tufin Orchestration Suite writes "A flexible, very secure solution that works well in Layer 2 environments". Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Sysdig Secure, whereas Tufin Orchestration Suite is most compared with AlgoSec, FireMon Security Manager, Skybox Security Suite, Palo Alto Networks Panorama and ManageEngine Firewall Analyzer. See our Tenable.io Container Security vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.