We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"We can reduce the bandwidth to minimize the attack level. If we see more than 2.5 GBs we drop it directly."
"The technical support of Arbor DDoS is good."
"We are able to respond quickly and prevent DDoS attacks."
"Its scalability is big. It is for large deployments of big organizations and service providers."
"Companies that live from their presence on the internet will get a very high return on investment from Arbor."
"Reporting is quite good. There are several pages of reporting on DDoS attacks, and you can find all the details that you need."
"Analytics and its attack mitigation capabilities are valuable features of the solution."
"It's very pretty easy to onboard the URL."
"On the real time, you can see live traffic, which is flowing into our website."
"It blocks all types of attacks."
"The setup of Imperva DDoS was easy."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"We have peace of mind that nobody will use malware on us or try to hack our website."
"Real-time monitoring is also a great tool, as you may watch several parameters in real time."
"They're quite easy to install and quite easy to set up. Clients really like that. Especially when you're dealing with the cloud, it's really easy."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"There should be an automatic way to configure it to monitor traffic and decide which is an attack and which is not. In Arbor, you need to tweak and set all parameters manually, whereas in Check Point DDoS Protector, you can select the lowest parameters, and over the weeks, Check Point DDoS Protector will learn the traffic and you can then tighten some of the parameters to decide which traffic is regular and which is malicious."
"The following areas need improvement: opening and tracking support tickets, online support resources, software upgrades/updates and replacement media, and event management guidelines."
"The solution needs to enhance its features to compete with other tools."
"Arbor's SSL decryption is confusing and needs external cards to be installed in the devices. This is not the best solution from an architectural point of view for protecting HTTPS and every other protocol that is SSL encrypted."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"The support got worse after NETSCOUT acquired Arbor."
"I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions."
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"It's quite expensive."
"I am not sure if this application has a policy where you can create your custom policy and run it as our firewall. We should have some ability to also create some custom policy, then run it as a firewall."
"The weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."
"Some maintenance must be performed by our IT team."
"It would be better if we were able to manage and apply changes to multiple websites/web applications, and search WAF logs for multiple websites, via the Incapsula dashboard."
"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."
"Imperva DDoS does not provide version control."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, A10 Thunder TPS and Fortinet FortiDDoS, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Radware DefensePro, AWS WAF and Fastly. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Imperva DDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.