We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector 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."All the solution's features are very good."
"The product has a good UI."
"The solution easily identifies, delays, or allows business traffic."
"The solution can scale extremely well."
"The product has a good user interface."
"It gives us a report of traffic. It gives us a report of the day-to-day URL traffic, and it also gives an individual report. If we reach out to Akamai, they give us the IPs as well."
"It enables us to move faster with new products because we have this layer of protection set up in our infrastructure."
"The product is user-friendly."
"If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency."
"The solution integrates seamlessly with other tools and has a good alert mechanism."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"The solution can scale."
"Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code."
"Very intuitive and granular configuration - It does not require much time, or advanced knowledge, for configuration and maintenance."
"The tool's profiling feature maps all the web application directories and related components on the profile directory. It has improved the security of my client's website applications."
"Imperva is a Gartner leader, so its scalability, performance, and features are excellent."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved."
"The custom rules must be improved."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"They are already very flexible, but room for improvement is there. Reports generation could be better and should be improved."
"The WAF features definitely have a lot of room for improvement. A lot of the WAF is really basic. For some products or some of our solutions, we need to run a second layer of more advanced WAF. If it had better layer seven protection then we would not need a second WAF."
"One thing I asked them is to integrate the API discovery product that they have and push that data into Akamai App and API Protector so that we do not have two types of reviews to identify the type of traffic. We already know the APIs that are frequently getting used, so analysis becomes easier. We can integrate both products and use them."
"We are experimenting with EdgeWorkers to write our own code at the Edge level. It could grow to be much better."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall can improve by adding more features to the dashboard. increasing the visibility of the real-time events, besides configuring the administration itself."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"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."
"An improvement for Imperva WAF would be to reduce the number of false positives and create more strong use cases based on AI/ML or behavioral analytics."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
"Sometimes, support tickets don't get addressed quickly."
"Some of the features should be included in the next release is a file integrating monitoring tool. This feature should be improved."
"The only disadvantage of Imperva is that it is a pretty costly solution."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 47 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and Google Cloud Armor, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Imperva DDoS. See our Akamai App and API Protector 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.