Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Security Cloud Control vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 22, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Security Cloud Control
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
184
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Security Cloud Control is 1.2%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 22.5%, up from 20.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Vivek Balaji - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful guides, excellent support, integration could improve
Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users Cisco Defense Orchestrator can improve by providing more support for third-party security components. I have been using Cisco Defense Orchestrator for approximately eight months. The Cisco Defense…
MithatBulut - PeerSpot reviewer
New employees can quickly grasp the various IPs, devices, and the network's logical and physical
Tufin is primarily used to orchestrate and manage network traffic and firewall devices. It is specifically useful for implementing firewall policies and handling requests from clients that require policy updates or changes Tufin simplifies understanding network topology. New employees can quickly…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"With Cisco Defense Orchestrator, we can manage the complete Cisco Security solution. It provides a simple and centralized way to manage all products."
"We have quite a few Active Stone by pairs. If they fail over... I'll see that there's a change on it and I'll have a look. The only change on it is that now this one is the standby, it took over the active role. I can go into that firewall and find out what happened... and troubleshoot based on that. That's pretty cool too."
"The most valuable feature is being able to do centralized upgrades on the ASAs. We can select all of those ASAs, and say, "Upgrade these ASAs at this scheduled time." It will copy down the ASA image, ASDM image, and then do the upgrade and failovers, and then put it all back into service as required at a scheduled time. It automates that process for us."
"This product provides excellent centralized device controls and reporting."
"If our server is blocked, this solution shows us why it is blocked and allows us to update the network routing."
"If we have a firewall go down, I can hop into CDO, pull the latest configuration off and apply it. That's really good. It helps save time."
"The most valuable feature is the automation, as it reduces user intervention and allows us to focus on other tasks."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator has useful guides for the steps that need to follow by users."
"This solution has helped our clients because it allows them to leverage the tools so that they can actually reduce their overall expenses for the environment."
"Being able to customize your own clarity to that aspect of change management."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it reduces both the time required and the number of errors when making changes."
"The best feature for me is being able to look up objects within all of our policies, because we have a little over 12,000 rules and over 30,000 objects. When one person says, 'Hey, where's my server?' I can just go to Tufin and say, 'Hey, where is that server?' and very quickly it tells you where it is, what policy it's on. That is a life saver."
"It has allowed us to be more efficient in our processing of firewall requests."
"The most valuable feature of Tufin is security auditing. We are able to check the rules and compliance of the company, for example, what is allowed or not. We are able to check the rules over different gateways and set over firewalls."
"The stability is bulletproof."
"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."
 

Cons

"The dashboard needs to be more customizable to provide better reporting for our network."
"It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances."
"They can centralize all products and provide a correlation about an incident and the response. They can also provide an on-premises solution. Currently, Cisco Defense Orchestrator is just for cloud deployments, not for on-premises deployments. Customers have to manage it on the cloud. We are based in Vietnam, and most of the customers here prefer to have on-premises deployments. Customers, especially from banking and government sectors, do not prefer to do anything on the cloud. Some of the small enterprises use the cloud."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall."
"Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up."
"When logging into the device, we sort of had problems with it staying in sync. If somebody made a change onsite, it wouldn't do an automatic sync. It would have to wait, as you would have to do a manual sync up."
"It would be a better product if it incorporated device control for third-party products easily."
"I've found dozens of bugs over the year we've been using it. The more I use it for different things, the more problems I find... Most of the problems have to do with the user interface. A lot of thought and work has gone into the back-end component to make the product do what it's intended to do, but the way it is presented for use hasn't gotten nearly as much thought to make it smart and bug-free."
"This solution increases the time it takes to make changes."
"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."
"The key area for improvement is the integration to F5. One of the things that we encountered with another customer is that there were some limitations when we tried to migrate policies from F5 into Tufin."
"I would like easier integration with more automation."
"The older version that we have doesn't support some newer firewall vendors."
"In the next release I would like to see better migration in the Cloud because that will allow more visibility in the network."
"The product should integrate with the UTM features."
"I would also like to see them do more cloud integration within the Tufin Orchestration Suite, not within a SaaS solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's around £500 per unit for a three-year license."
"After our free trial was done we got a subscription for three years and it was under $3,000 or so. It's part of the EA we already paid for, so I don't know what it would be if it was a la carte."
"If you compare to what is available on the market, they are in the same range with respect to pricing."
"It is about a $100 per year for an ASA 5506 firewall, and from there it keeps going up if you have a bigger box. For example, the 5516 is $200 to $300 per year."
"I work with a lot of clients, and the price or value of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator can vary from one client to another. If you have a lot of Cisco solutions, the price of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator is justified. Whereas if you have some security components from other vendors, such as Check Point or Palo Alto. This solution would be a pretty expensive proposition considering that they don't integrate with them well."
"It is covered under the CIsco Enterprise License Agreement (ELA). So, it is licensed and ours."
"Licensing is on a customer by customer basis."
"The solution has helped reduce the time it takes us to make changes. It helps make overall integrated changes immediately. It allows us to cut down at least a few hours in the week in regards to changes and monitoring."
"We did look at less expensive solutions than Tufin, but being a corporation, this solution made sense."
"The seller of Tufin, when I wanted the solution, was very flexible because the cost on the lease was very high in Latin America. So, he was able to reduce the cost."
"Our evaluation showed that Tufin's features were on par with AlgoSec, but Tufin was the better financial choice."
"We have seen ROI just in the time savings and knowledge. Knowledge is power. Having the solution do it automatically for you without you doing the work is huge. If you are spending $50,000 a year, it could have cost you a $100,000 in man-hours without it, especially if you are working with a team.."
"There are ways to deploy the license to different types of firewall. However, if we decide to change the physical brand of the firewall, we need to go back to Tufin and modify the licensing. This is a hassle."
"We've seen a decrease of about 50 percent in the overall time it takes to complete a firewall change."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
49%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Legal Firm
3%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up. Additionally, I suggest impro...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes.
What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Defense Orchestrator?
Those who want to use Cisco Defense Orchestrator should build their own use case and see if it fits their environment. The most significant benefit for us is the response time because it automates ...
What needs improvement with Tufin SecureCloud?
Tufin Orchestration Suite ( /products/tufin-orchestration-suite-reviews ) is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendo...
What is your primary use case for Tufin SecureCloud?
I have primarily used Skybox and AlgoSec ( /products/algosec-reviews ). I have also interacted with FireMon for compiling. However, I am not currently working with ACA, and I don't have any project...
What advice do you have for others considering Tufin SecureCloud?
There is potential for improvement in explaining the analytics in the dashboard for Tufin Orchestration Suite. Tufin Orchestration Suite does provide good monitoring; however, interpreting the grap...
 

Also Known As

Cisco Defense Orchestrator, CDO
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Insurance Company of British Columbia, Shawmut
3M, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNP Parabas, ConocoPhillips, Deutsche Bank, GE, IBM, Pfizer, United States Postal Service 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Security Cloud Control vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.