Cloudflare Zero Trust Services vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite

For example, Cloudflare is a very good solution for ZTNA implementation. Cloudflare has Warp for propagating Gateway rules and checking device posture. Browser Isolation gives you more abilities to use internet resources without any restrictions and at the same time not put the company at risk. For example, if there is no DLP solution in place blocking the printing function can partly protect the company's sensitive data from intentional or intentional leakage through the online forms. A similar approach protects the end-user device from Zero-day threats and malicious software code. Moreover, Remote Browser Isolation technology protects not only the user's device but also the user himself from possible phishing attacks - for example, even if the user enters his username and password on the phishing website, bank card issuers, or other personal or confidential data, data will not go beyond the isolated cloud environment. Cloudflare Access gives company administrators a great opportunity to implement role-based access policies and make effect segmentation and diversification of company network groups.

Incentivized

Well suited scenarios - 1) Firewall Policy / Ruleset management 2) Where all the products are from Tufin like TOS ST, SC, SecureApp etc 3) Where customer focuses on ruleset compliance - USP violations, and other features Less suited - 1) Agnostic/distributed environment - Tough with integrate with 3rd party like CyberArk 2) FW recertification processes / exception process when complex process is included

Incentivized

• Block access to known bad, risky, or unwanted destinations at the DNS or HTTP level.
• Excellent protection for remote users.
• Best in class browser isolation techniques.

Incentivized

• Firewall management
• Compliance reports
• Unused rules and optimization
• Policy Automation

Incentivized

• Very API [oriented] which is fine, but the GUI is sometimes inconsistent

Incentivized

• Palo Alto Networks Integration
• Better/more user friendly api for integration with ticketing systems
• Web UI structure is not user-friendly

Incentivized

Good chat support from the portal for basic questions and minor issues. The enterprise support line is provided as well.

As long as all Cloudflare products and services rely on anycast technology, in a complex approach Cloudflare is faster and more relevant for cloud applications. The balance between security and performance is fully established. Also, Cloudflare has quite a good stack for API connection protection, like the API Shield example, which makes it more effective compared to F5 for example. Warp as a ZTNA agent gives better visibility and device posture information than FortiClient does.

Incentivized

1) Fairly okay overall but definitely needs improvement overall Vs the other products available in the market like Palo Alto XSOAR 2) Cost wise okay at the beginning but when client demands add-ons/ more features/customization tailored to their needs, Tufin Orchestration Suite recommends RFE / custom costs/development costs 3) USP feature is cool to use overall Vs FireMon 4) Tufin ProServ needs to buckle-up/Support compared to other competitors in the market

Incentivized

• Complete solution in case of using with Cloudflare Access.
• No need of maintenance.
• No skilled staff and trainings required.

Incentivized

• I think if you correctly configure your SIEM, you don't need Tufin. You can correlate a lot of things for firewalls.

Incentivized