We performed a comparison between Barracuda Web Application Firewall 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."There is no one special feature, but the WAF itself is valuable: user-friendly protection against web attacks etc., authentication, reporting, accountability, alerting, and hardened OS."
"I find the solution very stable."
"Setup of this solution is straightforward. It's a stable and scalable solution, with good performance and fast technical support."
"Barracuda Web Application Firewall provides optimized performance, a user-friendly environment, helpful dashboards, and is simple to use."
"Parameter Protection is a valuable feature."
"If an attack is coming continuously, you can ask the device to block it temporarily for two to three minutes. F5 has not provided us with an option to block certain IPs for some time. Barracuda can help you block someone if the source is from a different IP. You can apply the rule to the device and block it for whatsoever time you want. The solution will unblock the IP after the prescribed time as well."
"What I like most about Barracuda Web Application Firewall is its availability. I also like that it's an easy-to-use solution."
"Some of the most valuable features are the ease of deployment, the Barracuda support, the easy-to-use console, and the granularity of the reports."
"The WAF itself has been very valuable to me because it has such a complete range of features. Another reason why I like it is because it also takes care of the total overview of the traffic over the network."
"Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like signatures to identify attacks like cross-site scripting or SQL injection."
"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."
"Data masking is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency."
"We can prevent attacks or issues even before they happen."
"Its inline transferring mode is the most valuable because it is 100% transparent. When you change the IP, there is no change on the network side. If you can't and want to try to reach an IP, you can reach the server IP. There are many other advanced security features in it. The smallest appliances of Imperva can handle the highest traffic at a customer site. For example, a smaller appliance from Imperva can provide you the same security as an F5 product."
"One good thing about Imperva Web Application Firewall is it can be on the cloud and also it can be on-premise."
"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."
"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."
"We've had some blocks of the application and some false positives."
"The documentation is lacking. It's not like what you'd get if you were using Juniper or Cisco. They need to expand on it and make it more useful."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement."
"It is not stable nor mature."
"They should improve their features, so they easily compare to the competition."
"The policy updates could be improved."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"The user interface could be better."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall can improve by providing better features, such as improved prevention of zero-day attacks. Additionally, it should include a VR meta-analysis."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size. Learning capability of the device is quite weak."
"The reporting is missing some features, such as: only two export formats, and the time period does not include the last day, week, year."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 47 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, HAProxy and Citrix NetScaler, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Web Application Firewall. See our Barracuda Web Application Firewall 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.
Really depends on your requirement, budget and IT resources you have. If you are after an advanced WAF, imperva is the clear winner in my opinion. Comprehensive feature set, quite matured. But you will need proper training and experience to manage and get the best out of it. Mind you they are the only leader in Gartner MQ. But the price tag can be high. If you are looking for another good contender, look at Radware AppWall. Their product is good and the fully managed service offering is ideal for someone who has no expertise in WAF, in day today managing and making sure the rule set is optimized.
BTW Like any security solution, WAF is also as good as how well it is tuned. Specially if you plan to put it inline, make sure you not only consider the product, but a good service partner too.
They're both great products that provides WAF services at the top of their class and hence not better but more suitable in different scenarios. It all comes down to the environment you wish to deploy those into, the scale of the web services which you will be protecting, the ratio of dynamic pages to static ones, the volume of traffic, the location of your customers/end-users and finally the cost (e.g. you may need to load balance over a few Barracudas to accomplish the same throughput provided by Imperva)
Barracuda is deployed in a pinch, but is very clearly a "conformity" WAF. Imperva's is a fulll fledge WAF, very complete, with a lot of granularity and reporting. Imperva's solution requieres a long, costly deployment. Both companies target very different market segments.
Today i would say Barracuda is the better WAF based on that Imperva Dev slowed down over the last two years and the customers give bad feedback on the support, but there is a newer generation of WAF´s in the market that is better than Imperva and Barracuda, both in performance and price, PT application firewall, the only visionary in the GMQ