We performed a comparison between Azure Front Door and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two CDN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"You can assign as many web application firewall policies as you want to the same instance of Front Door."
"I particularly appreciate its load-balancing capabilities as it allows us to manage multiple instances and support a global presence effectively."
"The solution is good."
"I am impressed with the tool's integrations."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"The price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"The web application firewall is a great feature."
"Its unique interface for managing security performance and ease of use are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Imperva Incapsula has many valuable features. One, it protects the top 10 OWAS vulnerability, the open web application software platform, this is standard. Secondly, it protects against broken authentication. As well, it has remote execution of code."
"On the real time, you can see live traffic, which is flowing into our website."
"It fits our requirements, as well as our budget."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"It is an effective threat mitigation tool."
"This product is a reliable defense from malicious attacks on a network environment."
"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."
"I'm responsible for the governance and cost control of Azure. I'm not a specialist in any products and therefore I couldn't really speak effectively to features that are lacking or missing."
"My suggestion for improvement would be to enhance the Data Export feature to include specific tables, particularly the Azure Diagnostics table."
"The product needs to improve its latency."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"We should be able to use Front Door defenders with multiple cloud vendors. Currently, they can be used only with the Azure cloud. Azure Front Door should also be able to do global load balancing and provide internal front door services. Microsoft should clearly define what Traffic Manager, Application Gateway, and Azure Front Door products do. These are similar products, and people get confused between these products."
"The product's features are limited compared to Cloudflare. The tool also doesn't work well in a hybrid environment. I would like to see a way to add personalized APIs in the system."
"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"It lacks sufficient functionality."
"Certificate management could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve Integration with third parties for their on-prem deployment models. The integration is not that good yet."
"Imperva now offers add-ons to add functionality, but I would like to see these included in the product, even if it would cost more."
"It needs to be improved every time there are new attacks."
"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."
"There’s nothing that’s missing in terms of features."
"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."
"The log analytics interface within Incapsula isn't really good. For example, if you have to get all logs from there, it's a very cumbersome process."
Azure Front Door is ranked 2nd in CDN with 10 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 5th in CDN with 74 reviews. Azure Front Door is rated 8.8, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Front Door writes " An easy -to-setup stable solution that enables implementing resources globally and has a good technical support team". 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". Azure Front Door is most compared with Amazon CloudFront, Cloudflare, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai and AWS Global Accelerator, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF. See our Azure Front Door vs. Imperva DDoS report.
See our list of best CDN vendors and best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all CDN 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.