We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Radware Cloud WAF Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"The ability to take multiple data sets and match those data sets together is the solution's most valuable feature. The data lake that comes with it is very useful because that allows us to match data sets with different configurations that we wouldn't normally be able to match."
"We preferred the product based on its cost. AWS WAF is an out-of-the-box solution and integrates with the AWS services that we use. It's natively integrated with AWS."
"We do not have to maintain the solution."
"It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need."
"One common use case is using detection protection for enhancing security models in AWS. Another use case is implementing log analysis and response recovery procedures for email services."
"AWS has flexibility in terms of WAF rules."
"Their technical support has been quite good."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service is user-friendly and easy to deploy."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service has several valuable features, with good support and a user-friendly GUI."
"From a financial point of view, we no longer need to appropriate more horsepower to our backend web servers constantly to service these requests because Cloud WAF is preventing malicious bots from accessing our web page. It reduced the load on our backend."
"The solution requires very little maintenance; we install it, it works without any problems, is reliable, and we can almost forget about it."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring dashboard that we access through the portal."
"The most valuable feature of Radware Cloud WAF Service is the visibility into attacks that are being cut off instantly."
"With the current visibility dashboard, we can now obtain insight into the nature of attacks, identify attackers, and detect top IP or threat regions."
"What makes this a comprehensive offering from Radware is that it combines WAF, ADA, bot management, and API protection, which is not currently available from any other provider in the market."
"The product could be improved by expanding the weightage units of rules."
"We should be able to do proper whitelisting."
"I would like to be able to view a graphical deployment map in the user interface that will give me an overview of the configuration and help to determine whether I have missed any steps."
"When users choose the free service, there isn't great support available to them."
"On the UI side, I would like it if they could bring back the geolocation view on the corner."
"It will be helpful if the product recommends rules that we can implement."
"The price could be improved."
"The solution should identify why it blocks particular websites."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service should provide SSL certificates for its hosting customers."
"They've changed their process for call logging. I suppose it's fine, but I used to be able to send emails in. They could also build up more local resiliency here in South Africa. They're working on that, so it isn't much of an issue now."
"We've had some issues with putting certificates in."
"The connection between the front and back ends could be improved."
"We receive many reports from our security team of IPs flagged by our security tools, such as Palo Alto. I cannot add the file containing the IPs to get them blocked; instead, I have to contact Radware support and open a ticket for them to do it. I need to be able to block flagged IPs myself, as it currently takes more time to open a ticket, contact the support team, and wait four to six hours for a response. I want to be able to upload a file with 2,000-3,000 IPs in the console and then apply and save the configuration."
"The Cloud Portal has room for improvement."
"The lower-level technical team at Radware could improve their approach to problem-solving as they sometimes are very slow."
"There is a lot more that is expected from Radware's automated analytics for looking at events. There needs to be more context of where protection is required these days."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Radware Cloud WAF Service is ranked 11th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 17 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Radware Cloud WAF Service is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Cloud WAF Service writes "Serves as a comprehensive solution for both our current and prospective customers, generating revenue for us". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Fastly, whereas Radware Cloud WAF Service is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Imperva DDoS. See our AWS WAF vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.