We performed a comparison between Imperva DDoS and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, NETSCOUT, Akamai and others in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection."Technical support was very helpful."
"It's very pretty easy to onboard the URL."
"DDoS protection and WAF are the most valuable features. It is easy to deploy a service. It is easy and quick to deploy to a new website."
"Scalability is pretty easy on the base platform. You just add another, and you're ready to go."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"It blocks all types of attacks."
"An improvement has been to our website: It increases the speed of our response, the capacity of the site, and optimizes the bandwidth."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"The solution has plenty of features."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks WildFire are the good URL and file analysis that uses artificial intelligence. It has different interfaces, such as rest, SMTP protocol, and HTTPS. The Security incidents and event management are very good. Additionally, there are many file types that are supported and there is no limit to the number of files it can handle simultaneously. It integrates well with SIEM solutions."
"The most effective feature of WildFire for threat analysis is its collaboration with other security profiles on our Palo Alto firewall."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is its ability to adapt to environments and its robustness."
"Detailed reporting on analysis of content. The inspections are easily applied to security policy profiles and profile groups, and may be assigned on a per-rule basis."
"The graphic user interface of Palo Alto is good and it's easy to configure."
"The most valuable feature is the Automatic Verdict, to recognize whether something is a threat, or not."
"We get support in the free version."
"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."
"The rules surrounding the making of web applications could be improved."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"I would like to see automated reporting to improve visibility."
"There’s nothing that’s missing in terms of features."
"It's quite expensive."
"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."
"Any enhancements should likely be focused on the firewall appliance to further strengthen overall security capabilities, such as refining app and user identity features."
"The technical support response needs improvement."
"As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity."
"I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power."
"In the future, Palo Alto could reduce the time it takes to process the file."
"There are more specialized solutions that compete with Wildfire. Therefore, they need to work on their machine learning and AI to be more competitive."
"The product's false positive logs could be more user-friendly to understand. They could provide examples of precious cases to learn."
"They should make their user interface a little more user-friendly."
Imperva DDoS is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection and Fortinet FortiSandbox.
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.