We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Imperva DDoS 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."As a basic WAF, it's better than nothing. So if you need something simple out of the box with default features, AWS WAF is good."
"Rule groups are valuable."
"The interface is good."
"AWS WAF is a stable solution. The performance of the solution is very good."
"This is not a product that you need to install. You just use it."
"We can host any DB or application on the solution."
"The customizable features are good."
"The most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"It blocks all types of attacks."
"It is a stable solution."
"The technical support is excellent."
"Provides Anti-DDoS protection, as well as other protections like SQL injection, Cross-Site Scripting, and antiscanner. These types of protection are valuable to the business due to the daily attacks on our portals, and that often cannot be seen without a tool like this."
"Its unique interface for managing security performance and ease of use are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The solution is very good at intercepting traffic before it gets to our data centers."
"The solution can improve its price."
"The product should improve the DDoS-related features."
"It would be good if the solution provided managed WAF services."
"The solution should identify why it blocks particular websites."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"I would like to see the addition of more advanced rate-limiting features in the next release. It would be beneficial to extend rate limiting beyond just web servers to the main node level."
"They have to do more to improve, to innovate more features. They need to increase the security. It has to be more active in detecting threats."
"When users choose the free service, there isn't great support available to them."
"We had an issue when securing the web applications for DDoS protection."
"The rules surrounding the making of web applications could be improved."
"I miss being able to integrate the dashboard with other BI tools we are using. We have to export and import data to be able to present it, and doing so is a lot of work."
"We would like them to hire people in Sweden because it's quite hard when people are sitting in the UK or Belgium because some of the customers really want them to be local."
"Imperva DDoS does not provide version control."
"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."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"It's quite expensive."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 18th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Imperva DDoS 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 Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and F5 Silverline Managed Services, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and Fastly. See our AWS WAF vs. Imperva DDoS 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.