We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiWeb and Imperva Web Application Firewall 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 most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb is the reports and the AI-based features."
"FortiWeb offers a good price for the marketplace. In the Sri Lankan market, it's hard to find high-end products that can match FortiWeb's pricing. For high-end solutions, the price is always extremely high."
"The most valuable feature is the attack signature and machine learning."
"Fortinet is a great SD-WAN player when it comes to security capabilities."
"The most valuable features in Fortinet FortiWeb are sandboxing and threat prevention."
"The most valuable features are support and security."
"One main feature we are very happy about is file security and upload functionality."
"The GUI is user-friendly and it's easy to understand how to manage it."
"The solution is stable."
"Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like signatures to identify attacks like cross-site scripting or SQL injection."
"One good thing about Imperva Web Application Firewall is it can be on the cloud and also it can be on-premise."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"I am impressed with the product's scalability, availability, easy management, and security. We were able to integrate the product with Azure and Sentinel."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"There is a quick switch between any of the the nodes if something goes wrong, where there's a there's an attack against a specific area. The security setup is reasonably easy. It's not a problem to do setups and rules and integrations. And, yeah, just the the back end team is also very willing to insist if there's questions that that we cannot answer or with these questions that we do have"
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"The memory use in each of the appliances is problematic."
"In terms of performance, it needs to be more robust."
"The initial setup process could be improved."
"Integration and learning about attacks. I would improve these areas by making FortiWeb integrate with other network technologies and feedback from multiple platforms."
"The dashboards are not that configurable. Application-specific dashboards can be improved. If we have 50 applications, there should be something to see what's happening with these 50 applications. There could be a graph or a consolidated alert page where all alerts are inbuilt. They have other products that I can use, but this feature should be built into FortiWeb."
"If the price was lower, it would be a bit more attractive, as an option, to the customers."
"The initial setup in our data center was somewhat complex."
"Describing security rules should be improved. It's tricky to define new feature tools when you want to describe an attack pattern and want to block it."
"It would be useful if the solution used more intelligence in attack protection. For example, firewalls are to be dependent on the configuration, but if they could have some data science around it the solution would be even better. The profiling of the traffic, and making decisions surrounding that should be intelligence-based, instead of being based on the configuration of the firewall itself."
"The support for the on-premises version needs improvement."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
"I would like the solution to improve its support response time."
"It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"They recently separated the WAF and the DAM management gateways in order for each of these to be managed from different areas, so I believe it now requires additional investments for what was previously a single complete solution."
"The UI interface needs improvement."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews. Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Azure Front Door and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our Fortinet FortiWeb vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall 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.
