Arbor DDoS Reviews

• As an ISP, it is important to know from where the traffic comes so as to neutralize any attacks.

• The Arbor Networks SP device provided great visualization of the network traffic.

• Arbor Networks TMS is for cleaning the DDoS traffic, which is used sparsely.

The Arbor Networks SP device allowed us to optimize the network traffic. For example, it helped us to find the best IP network route to reach certain countries with low latency.

My opinion is that these Arbor devices should be scalable, in terms of the hardware.

Network bandwidth is rapidly increasing. Therefore, it is not practical to predict the network traffic as what it will be in five years time and also, to accordingly plan the required hardware specifications.

I have been using this solution since 2009.

We have been using the Arbor Peakflow SP CP-5000 and Arbor Peakflow TMS 2700.

Both the devices were very stable at the operation.

Unfortunately, these devices are not scalable and we have to upgrade to the next model in order to increase the threat mitigation capabilities.

We’ve received technical support mainly from Thailand. The guy who supported us was very competent with the products.

We were not using any other solution before.

The initial IP configuration has to be done in a command line, but the rest you can do via the web interface.

As a comparatively medium-scale ISP, we struggled with the license restrictions. By default, the Arbor SP device has only five licenses, which means only five routers can be integrated.

At that time (2008-09), when we checked the other options, there was not even a single product vendor that had the ability to do both network traffic analysis and DDoS traffic cleansing.

There were other proposals such as Radware and Cisco Guard for DDOS protection.

It is vital to identify the number of routers that are going to be integrated and the scrubbing capacity required for the expected lifetime of the product, as it is not scalable once you have purchased it.

For others who expect to implement Arbor, the key prerequisite is to identify the network devices that are going to integrate, since it will dictate the licensing. Since it is not scalable, so users should have to get this right before purchasing the product.

The deployment methods are really important as are the mitigation templates for volumetric and application-level attacks.

We do not have this product in our organization. We are service providers for Arbor.

This product improves the application's availability; we have mitigated targeted attacks for some clients.

I believe that the Arbor Cloud should be available, even if the customer does not have any Arbor appliance on-premise.

I have been using Arbor technologies for about two years.

In the two years I have been using the product, I haven't encountered any stability issues. The solution is pretty robust and stable.

Both solutions, Arbor Networks SP/TMS and APS, are very scalable.

The important point about Arbor Networks APS is that it is usually deployed inline, so you have to be aware of the number of switch ports available for each model.

I have a lot of experience with the technical support for multiple vendors (HPE, Cisco, Palo Alto Networks, Imperva, etc.) and the Arbor support is really good; usually, they respond with the workaround for your issue.

I really recommend the technical support from Arbor.

Setup complexity depends on the appliance:

• Arbor Networks APS: The setup is really straightforward; deployment and tuning are not that hard.
• Arbor Networks SP/TMS: This a complex solution and usually deployed in Diversion/Reinjection mode. Customers have to know the concepts and configuration about BGP, routing etc.

Arbor Networks APS licensing usually depends on the throughput of the enterprise.

Arbor Networks SP/TMS licensing usually depends on the throughput and the number of managed routers.

Note: It is not a cheap solution, but this is the most deployed anti-DDoS solution worldwide.

This is the first enterprise anti-DDoS product that we acquired. It later became Imperva.

You have to be clear as to what do you want to protect, i.e., the applications, networks, etc.

The most complex appliances are for the Arbor Networks SP/TMS solutions, so you have to know the BGP, peering, diversion, and reinjection concepts.

• It is user-friendly and has a very easy GUI.

• It provides the simplest method of mitigation.

• It provides predefined filters/techniques to easily stop attacks.

My last project was with (almost all of) the biggest banks and MNCs in India. It helped us to protect their network from the present DDoS attacks.

The auto-mitigation feature is provided when DDoS is observed on any of the links/customers (configured under auto-mitigation). It automatically starts mitigation with the default filters. In the default filter mode, there could be an impact on a customer’s link.

For example, if we have enabled monitoring of the internal traffic for that link/customer, it starts mitigation on legitimate traffic. It can also create looping in the network for any misconfiguration. This can impact the ISP's internal network and the customer's link utilization.

I have used this solution for two years.

We did not have stability issues.

We did not have scalability issues.

I would rate the technical support a 7/10.

We were using black-hole mitigation. We switched from that technique because we were dropping all the traffic of the attacked link, rather than vulnerable traffic; there were many more loopholes.

The setup is a little complex regarding the methods of configuration with the customers, as we need to provide them with a clean pipe path during mitigation. Also, it is mostly used on ISPs so the configuration on gateways is a little hectic.

They offer good prices.

I did not evaluate other options.

Be in direct contact with Arbor, rather than choosing a vendor in between.

I primarily use Arbor DDoS for scrubbing.

Arbor DDoS's best feature is that we can put the certificates in, and it will look at layer seven and the encrypted traffic and do the required signaling.

An improvement to Arbor DDoS would be to make evaluation licenses and virtual machines available. This would allow us to learn the system and to spread word about the product to others.

I've been using Arbor DDoS for almost five years.

Arbor DDoS is very stable.

Arbor DDoS is scalable.

The complexity of the setup depends on the user's experience, but it's very quick to deploy.

Arbor DDoS has given us a very good ROI - I would rate it five out of five.

I would rate Arbor DDoS ten out of ten.

Mitigating network level volumetric attacks, complete network visibility and complete control on applying countermeasures.

• DDoS amplification
• Flow specs
• Blackhole mitigation, and
• IP location policy to control traffic based on geolocation.

Cloud signaling integration with third-party DDoS solution provider. Currently, it supports only its DDoS APS box.

It is mostly for Internet Service Providers (ISPs). It is for operations on the service provider and network security operations. It is a good solution.

It improves our organization by preventing attacks and improving the availability of the network on services, which provides a better service to customers.

We are able to respond quickly and prevent DDoS attacks.

There is some room for AI to take place.

Stability is perfectly good. I have not seen an issue in years.

Its scalability is big. It is for large deployments of big organizations and service providers.

Technical support is good. They provide quite good support. They have different levels depending on the pockets that you have bought, so you get the relative support. They have a lot of levels for support and good SLAs.

The initial setup is complex, but experts are involved. Even with experts from both the vendor and the operator side, the initial set up can take some time, though it is essential.

We work with different vendors from different industries.

Most important important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• How the offering covers the business needs.
• The reputation of the vendor.

We observed traffic over six months to create a benchmark. We created alerts to trigger and be sent to our SOC once the traffic exceeds the benchmark.

The introduction of IP-intelligence helps in determining IPs with a bad reputation. We recently upgraded to the latest version and that functionality is enabled now. They've come up with centralized intelligence based on their own cloud, and they feed the data, the intelligence.

In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address. These help in analyzing traffic and blocking unwanted IP addresses as a preliminary troubleshooting step.

Also, they have a customer program where, if we find a blacklisted or bad-reputation IP, we can submit it to Arbor directly.

There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations. I would like to see more threat intelligence and internal traffic monitoring for C & C communications.

The product is very stable.

We have not faced any scalability issues since we have a very confined environment.

Tech support is good. They have really good expertise from the appliance point of view.

We did not have a previous solution.

Although I was not involved in the initial setup, I understand that it is easy. In terms of the specifics of our implementation, it's sensitive information so it can not be made public. Because of the criticality, I cannot comment on configuration or how is it implemented.

Regarding the simple setup, it is because of the out-of-the-box configurations which Arbor provides you with. I don't think there is another way to implement it as such. It was per Arbor's standards, so there was nothing that was done differently.

Pricing is average.

Go for the latest appliances.

We do have plans to increase our usage of this type of solution, but now there are a lot of other services coming up so we are looking in parallel at other stuff, for other functionalities and features from Arbor itself.

I rate Arbor DDoS at eight out of ten. They have done a considerable amount of development in the last few years when it comes to features. However, there is a restriction when the environment is hosted in the cloud and it is on-prem, so there a challenge there: The full-fledged features don't comply with certain requirements. There are always challenges.

The solution is easy to use. The user interface is also easy to use. The documentation provided by the product is good.

The support got worse after NETSCOUT acquired Arbor.

I have been using the solution for about seven to eight years.

The tool is quite stable. Our customers have used the tool for three to five years without rebooting.

Most of our customers are enterprise businesses.

Earlier, the support was great. Now, the support team provides delayed responses.

Neutral

The initial setup is quite easy. The time taken for deployment depends on the number of servers or machines we need to protect. In most cases, the product can be deployed in one day.

The product must improve its price. Our customers always complain about the price of the product. Most products are expensive in Taiwan. The product might be cheaper in other countries. However, I am not sure.

I do not expand the product. The products are usually standalone products. People should use the product. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.