We performed a comparison between Imperva DDoS and Reblaze 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 stable solution."
"Its unique interface for managing security performance and ease of use are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Setup was straightforward, very simple. I only entered the domain and Incapsula returned the DNS data that I needed to change for the protection to be configured."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"The most valuable features for us are the DDoS and Bot."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"The best thing about Reblaze, for us, is that it has been a game changer because previously, we were using Google's Web Application Firewall, but it wasn't up to the mark."
"It is a highly resilient product that can handle significantly larger workloads and high volumes of traffic with ease."
"We like the website protection. It's really good. The dashboard is really simple to use."
"The real-time monitoring and reporting are very good. There are information updates in their portal every two minutes. They also have the ability to spill it into Sumo Logic, for example. It's very easy to use."
"The main feature is using the rules and being able to see the traffic. It helps us find malicious traffic."
"Provides mobile app security."
"I very much like the elastic search and reports, allowing us to have a 360-degree view of the customer's activities and enabling us to track down any suspicious bots."
"Reblaze knows how to manage security. For me as, someone who knows little about security, it's good that I have a firm that optimizes everything according to their standards. It's their responsibility and they are fully hands-on."
"It needs to be improved every time there are new attacks."
"We had an issue when securing the web applications for DDoS protection."
"Its price could be improved. It is quite expensive. It will be good if we could export the configuration. Currently, to control the configuration, we need to go to each website, which is not very convenient."
"Users would benefit from better documentation. There is official documentation, but sometimes we need more detail. We have some use cases that are not so run of the mill. It would be great if there was a knowledge base that we could go to for more answers."
"It's quite expensive."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"Some maintenance must be performed by our IT team."
"The solution needs to improve Integration with third parties for their on-prem deployment models. The integration is not that good yet."
"The next release should have next-generation automation."
"The WAF features are not as granular as we would expect from a WAF system. There should be more granularity and in-depth rules, out-of-the-box."
"I would like to have seen more automated reports. Maybe it has been improved in the last year and I'm just not aware of it. But from a managerial point of view, you want a summary report, a weekly report: How many attacks were blocked? How much bandwidth was saved due to the caching mechanism? What were the top-ten attacks that were tested on the network, etc? I could most likely have found all that data if I logged in to the system and ran different reports. It would be very helpful to get a management report on a weekly basis."
"It would be beneficial if it had a workflow or a feature that could fine-tune settings based on high-level requirements."
"There is room for improvement in helping us understanding session management... We want Reblaze to catch and identify everything. We want to see the various devices doing one activity and to see, in a timeline, what's happened. We would like to see a more human-readable display to understand what's happening in the web app."
"We have multiple products behind different instances of Reblaze. We have one instance for staging and then we have a production instance for multiple products. One of the things that we have requested is a unified view panel, so that we can see each of the instances in a unified view. That way, we won't have to go bouncing from instance to instance."
"Up to now the only cons I could find is sometimes getting change management back on track, because it's a company that evolves, and sometimes I don't have the same needs that they have. But besides that, up until now, I am really pleased with their service and I've also recommended them to some of my clients."
"They have an interface that you have to adjust to. That is a bit of a downfall because I expect an interface to be very intuitive for someone who knows little about security. But if you know about security, the interface is wonderful."
Imperva DDoS is ranked 18th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews while Reblaze is ranked 23rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews. Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8, while Reblaze is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Reblaze writes "Offers flexibility with a kill switch for bypassing Reblaze if needed and provides a reliable Layer 7 defense against attacks". Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF, whereas Reblaze is most compared with Cloudflare, F5 Advanced WAF, Radware Alteon, AWS WAF and Akamai Bot Manager. See our Imperva DDoS vs. Reblaze report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors and best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.