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

AWS WAF vs Imperva Web Application Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Imperva Web Application Fir...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
51
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 Imperva Web Application Firewall is 6.4%, down from 7.1% 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…
Abdullah Jin - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 9, 2024
Offers bot protection and DDoS Protection and protects public-facing portals
Support is one thing I wish Imperva could improve. They follow the phone model and keep rotating you from one customer service person to another. The layer one support isn't very clear about the workings of the product. My feedback is primarily about Imperva Cloud, not on-premise. On-premise is a whole new story. Support is the issue for Imperva Cloud. It's also a bit pricey. It's a premium service and very expensive. The licensing model is not very straightforward. Every feature is priced separately, and to enjoy maximum protection, you'll have to spend a lot of money. The licensing model is a bit complex, and each feature is very pricey. For example, API security and web application protection are two separate license packages.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We do not have to maintain the solution."
"It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need."
"The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is the extra layer of security that I have when connecting to my web applications."
"The ease of deployment of the product is valuable to me."
"Rule groups are valuable."
"AWS WAF is very easy to use and configure on AWS."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was very simple."
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"The valuable features of Imperva WAF include its effective security breach prevention through automatically updating rules."
"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."
"We can prevent attacks or issues even before they happen."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"It mitigates all of the availabilities of risks around web applications."
"It has fewer false positives"
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are DDoS, malware, and the other malicious threat prevention it provides. Additionally, third-party integration is available. You can forward the log for further analysis."
 

Cons

"The setup is complicated."
"We have issues with reporting, troubleshooting, and analytics. AWS WAF needs to bring costs down."
"We don't have much control over blocking, because the WAF is managed by AWS."
"Compatibility and integration functionalities, especially with services like Kafka for event-driven messaging, could be better."
"The pricing model is complicated."
"The solution should identify why it blocks particular websites."
"The solution could be more reliable."
"The product must provide more features."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
"Support is one thing I wish Imperva could improve."
"The user interface could be better."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
"Their portal is very limited and needs improvement."
"There could be some limitations that from the converged infrastructure perspective: when you want to converge with everything and you want Imperva to get there easily because it's not a cloud component. For example, when you want to build servers and you're using OneView to manage your software-defined networks, implementing Imperva right away is not that simple. But if you're doing just a simple cloud infrastructure with servers in there, you're good to go. Also, we are not able, with Imperva, to block by signatures. Imperva by itself needs to be complemented with another service to do URL filtering."
"Sometimes our web application firewall will slow down."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its price is fair. There is a very fair amount that they charge. It has a pay-as-you-go model, so it pretty much depends on how much a user uses it. As per the cloud norms, the more you use, the more you pay. I would rate it a five out of ten in terms of pricing."
"AWS WAF has reasonable pricing."
"It's quite affordable. It's in the middle."
"We are kind of doing a POC comparison to see what works best. Pricing-wise, AWS is one of the most attractive ones. It is fairly cheap, and we like the pricing part. We're trying to see what makes more sense operation-wise, license-wise, and pricing-wise."
"It's an annual subscription."
"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."
"The solution's cost depends on the use cases."
"I would rate AWS WAF's pricing a seven out of ten."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall's pricing is expensive."
"The price is high compared to other solutions like FortiWeb."
"It's an excellent product, but it can be very costly."
"There is a license for this solution and we purchase the license annually with no additional fees."
"It is a very affordable solution."
"There are some licenses that you have to buy to use some features. Its price could be better. Price is always important because, at the end of the day, customers have a budget. If you can meet the budget, you can sell, and if you don't, you cannot sell."
"The cost of this solution depends on the platform."
"The price of this solution is a little bit high compared to competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 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
5%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
 

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.
Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
DDoS solutions: Any other solutions to consider aside from Radware DefensePro and F5 Silverline DDoS Protection?
You can have a look to Imperva Cloud WAF, the anti-DDoS mitigation is under 1s and works very well. I observed a lot of DDoS attacks that were well managed (even not seen by the customer) by Imperv...
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
BlueCross BlueShield, eHarmony, EMF Broadcasting, GE Healthcare, Metro Bank, The Motley Fool, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.