We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and F5 Advanced WAF 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."The CDN and the WAF features are the best."
"I like that the charges are all based on usage and labor costs. For the time that we spend onboarding almost 252020 FQDN, Akamai charges us only for the traffic usage, but it's only charging us for the labor costs for onboarding."
"The most valuable feature is the custom rules feature. This is because many of our customers require a lot of custom rules. Because it's a very customized project for our customers, I think they have the best of everything already."
"Traffic filtering and WAF are valuable."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"It enables us to move faster with new products because we have this layer of protection set up in our infrastructure."
"The solution easily identifies, delays, or allows business traffic."
"I have contacted the support team of Akamai... I am happy with their responses and answers to my problems."
"iRules are quite appealing when it comes to F5."
"I like all of the features, but the main one is the attack signatures."
"F5 Advanced WAF is a stable solution, we are satisfied. It is more stable than ForiWeb."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the security features and the protection."
"F5 Advanced WAF secures our connectivity and combines both the main functions of WAF (balancing and web application security)."
"It's scalable and very easy to manage."
"This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"We are experimenting with EdgeWorkers to write our own code at the Edge level. It could grow to be much better."
"It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"The WAF features definitely have a lot of room for improvement. A lot of the WAF is really basic. For some products or some of our solutions, we need to run a second layer of more advanced WAF. If it had better layer seven protection then we would not need a second WAF."
"One thing I asked them is to integrate the API discovery product that they have and push that data into Akamai App and API Protector so that we do not have two types of reviews to identify the type of traffic. We already know the APIs that are frequently getting used, so analysis becomes easier. We can integrate both products and use them."
"The performance of the cloud monitoring tool is low."
"There should be more ability to rate limit certain scenarios. The majority of the time, it is either on or off. For certain types of use cases, there should be the ability to rate limit, not just enable or disable."
"While F5 Advanced WAF does limit the number of partners in certain regions to ensure successful business transactions, they could also benefit from expanding their partnerships and making it easier for more people to learn about and become experts in F5 Advanced WAF. By doing so, they could increase the reach and exposure of their solution, similar to how Cisco has become widely recognized in the security industry."
"I would like to see a better interface and better documentation compatibility with other products. It's more complicated with OWASP."
"I would like for there to be a cloud-based solution, this would also help to improve scalability."
"The solution's dashboard could be improved. When you're moving from policy to policy, the logs and the integration of the logs in other systems aren't straightforward."
"F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards."
"It's sometimes difficult to customize APIs with F5 Advanced WAF."
"The BNS module needs improvement."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and AWS Shield, whereas F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). See our Akamai App and API Protector vs. F5 Advanced WAF 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.
