Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS WAF vs Barracuda Web Application Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Barracuda Web Application F...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 13.7%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Barracuda Web Application Firewall is 2.0%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Rohit Kesharwani - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 24, 2024
A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks
We use AWS WAF to protect our application from different kinds of attacks. We use AWS WAF for retail customers Our retail application is vulnerable to a lot of bot attacks. AWS WAF helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection that happen within the retail industry. The…
Carlo Bertini - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 8, 2023
Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises
The Barracuda support depends. Sometimes, they solve the issue promptly, but normally, they are not so fast and are not entirely focused on the problem. For example, sometimes I write many requests on the tickets, asking for one, two, three, or four steps and asking for one to three resolutions. Often, they respond with only one or two. So, I need to push again and again. In other cases, I ask questions and get positive feedback immediately, depending on who the technician is. Barracuda has engineers in the USA, UK, and other countries, so it depends on the technician's location and expertise. So, I am not completely satisfied, but sometimes it is okay, and sometimes it is not okay. So, depending on the region and depending on the person who actually receives these tickets, the technical support could be more knowledgeable. So they may need some training or education for the entire staff to respond immediately without any delays. Often, it happens that they respond because they need to, not because they understand the technology I'm using. So they respond just because it's required by the service level agreement, which specifies a response time within four hours. But this is just a response, not a resolution of the case. Sometimes, the response is within the agreed time, but the solution takes much longer.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable features are the geo-restriction denials and the web ACL."
"The ease of deployment of the product is valuable to me."
"The most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"AWS WAF helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection that happen within the retail industry."
"AWS WAF is very easy to use and configure on AWS."
"The product’s availability, ease of configuration, and documentation are valuable."
"As a basic WAF, it's better than nothing. So if you need something simple out of the box with default features, AWS WAF is good."
"One common use case is using detection protection for enhancing security models in AWS. Another use case is implementing log analysis and response recovery procedures for email services."
"The updating and signature features are my primary use case for the solution. These features are beneficial to my organization."
"The solution ensures layer seven is secure from attacks."
"We use Barracuda to protect the application. That's the main feature we use it for."
"Parameter Protection is a valuable feature."
"Setup of this solution is straightforward. It's a stable and scalable solution, with good performance and fast technical support."
"The solution offers multiple security features. There are machine learning features and great URL encryption. It also offers multi-protocol support against DDoS attacks."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, especially if you enlist assistance."
 

Cons

"The price could be improved."
"Technical support for AWS WAF needs improvement."
"When users choose the free service, there isn't great support available to them."
"We have issues with reporting, troubleshooting, and analytics. AWS WAF needs to bring costs down."
"It is sometimes a lot of work going through the rules and making sure you have everything covered for a use case. It is just the way rules are set and maintained in this solution. Some UI changes will probably be helpful. It is not easy to find the documentation of new features. Documentation not being updated is a common problem with all services, including this one. You have different versions of the console, and the options shown in the documentation are not there. For a new feature, there is probably an announcement about being released, but when it comes out, there is no actual documentation about how to use it. This makes you either go to technical support or community, which probably doesn't have an idea either. The documentation on the cloud should be the latest one. Finding information about a specific event can be a bit challenging. For this solution, not much documentation is available in the community. It could be because it is a new tool. Whenever there is an issue, it is just not that simple to resolve, especially if you don't have premium support. You have pretty much nowhere to look around, and you just need to poke around to try and make it work right."
"The default content policy available in the tool is not very strong compared to the competitors."
"They have to do more to improve, to innovate more features. They need to increase the security. It has to be more active in detecting threats."
"While the complexity of the installation can vary from one service to another, overall, I would say that it and the configuration and navigation are somewhat complex."
"They could improve their performance, support, and their upgrades. Their updates used to be good. Their improvements were right on the money but nowadays, the updates are minor."
"While the UI is good, it can get a little bit complicated."
"I have issues with the load balancing of the solution which is slow. The connection pooling in Barracuda also doesn't work. There is an issue when someone needs access to a site quickly. The issue is with HTTPS services. I am not sure if they have changed all these in the solution’s latest version."
"I would like to see an improved capacity to store logs so that they will be available for a longer time."
"Its interface can be better. It is not very friendly."
"This product could easily progress to be among the industry leaders. I think they need to improve enterprise level automation. It integrates with a small number of vulnerability scanners, so report results should be imported manually; same for SIEM integration."
"It would be better if their updates would be released annually."
"There are issues when upgrading firewalls and we experience different issues across customers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of AWS WAF is expensive if you do not know how to manage your software up or down. I price of the solution is average amongst the other competitors but it would be better if it was less expensive."
"AWS is not that costly by comparison. They are maybe close to $40 per month. I think it was between $29 or $39."
"AWS WAF costs $5 monthly plus $1 for the rule. It's cheap, cost-wise. It's worth the money."
"It's quite affordable. It's in the middle."
"The price is average."
"AWS WAF has reasonable pricing."
"The product is moderately priced."
"It has a variable pricing scheme."
"The product is expensive."
"The price of this solution is okay."
"The solution is based on a licensing model and might be $360 for the hybrid version."
"They have competitive pricing."
"The Barracuda Web Application Firewall is quite expensive."
"The price of the solution is a little expensive. There is a license for this solution and it can be purchased every one, two, or five years."
"They only offer a yearly licensing plan."
"While I would have to check on the price of the solution, I feel it to be okay and it matches the market price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Educational Organization
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What do you like most about AWS WAF?
The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system.
What do you like most about Barracuda Web Application Firewall?
It significantly improved our overall web security posture, addressing intrusions and enhancing control over web URLs in our environment.
What is your primary use case for Barracuda Web Application Firewall?
I use the solution in my company to protect our website.
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Oracle, CBS, Pioneer, Hyundai, Publix, Barnes Noble, Calzedonia, Nordstrom, Samsung, Nascar
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Barracuda Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.