F5 Advanced WAF vs NSFOCUS Web Application Firewall comparison

"Someone with a basic understanding of networking and security will be able to implement the firewall's basic features within 15 minutes."

"I'm highly satisfied. It's remarkably user-friendly, enabling me to quickly identify issues, and deploy solutions, and it offers the necessary features."

"The product has improved our security posture by blocking bad actors."

"The product has a valuable security control functionality."

"The stability of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall deserves a perfect 10 out of 10."

"The initial setup process is simple."

"The Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's most valuable feature is its ease of configuration."

"There is a huge signature repository"

"It's scalable and very easy to manage."

"It provides web application security and reduces bot attacks."

"F5 Advanced WAF secures our connectivity and combines both the main functions of WAF (balancing and web application security)."

"It can scale."

"F5's user-friendly interface and seamless integration stand out as the most valuable features for us."

"Feature-wise, they are always cutting edge and up-to-date. Many features aren't available via competitors. There's always a lot of enhanced critical features that just aren't available through anyone else, or, if they are, are too lightweight."

"F5 helped to meet compliance and regulatory requirements."

"The bot defense capability, as well as protection from brute force attacks and OWASP Top Ten, are notable features."

"Since we are using this tool for protection purposes we really appreciate the hybrid security abilities; the main idea here is that we powerful protection our application needs."

"Support can be challenging at times."

"The product can improve by having more multitenancy capability, which is currently not available."

"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should improve visibility for a customer."

"The platform's control features related to real-time authentication and response time need improvement."

"If they add logs history within the Cloudflare offering, that would be a great benefit."

"The learning curve was steep initially."

"The blocked logs are difficult to read at times."

"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well. They have documentation for everything you're looking for, but they lack a single piece of documentation to tie everything together. As a new user or beginner, it took us a little bit of time to figure out how to put all these things in place."

"We usually use a third-party tool for logging and reporting. It would be nice if we could do that right on this solution. They have one, but it's not very stable. Logging and reporting effectively would be a big enhancement."

"Scalability could be improved."

"The BNS module needs improvement."

"The administrator's user interface and some of the settings can sometimes be very complicated to understand."

"One area for improvement in the product is its SSO integration, which posed challenges and required significant effort to resolve."

"One improvement for AOF could be focusing on enhancing its AI engine to make it more mature."

"It should be a little bit easy to deploy in terms of the overall deployment session. One of our customers is a bit unhappy about the reporting options. Currently, it automatically deletes event logs after some limit if a customer doesn't have any external Syslog server. It is a problem for those customers who want to review event logs after a week or so because they won't get proper reports or event logs. They should increase the duration to at least a month or two for storing the data on the device. F5 is not a leader in Gartner Quadrant, which affects us when we go and pitch this solution. Customers normally go and take a look at such annual reports, and because F5 is currently not there as a leader, the customers ask about it even though we are saying it is good in all things. F5 is not known for something totally different or unique. They were a major player in ADP, and they are just rebranding themselves into security. They should improve or increase their marketing as a security company now. They have already started to do that, but they should do it more so that when it comes to security, customers can easily remember F5. At the moment, if we say F5, load balancing comes to mind. With rebranding and marketing, all customers should get the idea that F5 is now mainly focusing on the security part of it, and it is a security company instead of load balancing. This is the first solution that should come to a customer's mind for a web application firewall."

"On the features I wish existed, Big-IP Advanced WAF is primarily an on-premises solution and in that solution, there are not enough features that need to be there to protect API-based applications."

"There is a need for expanded licensing terms and options. There's also a need for improved and more agile customization features. The user needs to be able to manage each policy as required; the functionality needs to empower the user. There should be a complete suite of desktop provider policies available to users. Overall, it needs to be more user-friendly."

"The pricing model is very straightforward compared to the competition. You just pay per month for the product and usage."

"What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I believe the pricing is not the best, but it's reasonable and acceptable. We also use the McAfee system in parallel. In terms of pricing, its okay - not great, but not bad either. It falls in the middle, which is acceptable. In terms of support licensing, last time, we were searching for a solution, and we considered products from resellers rather than directly from the cloud provider. However, the pricing we encountered was exceptionally high. As a result, we are inclined to select support from the reseller."

"Cloudflare offers different types of subscriptions for businesses, enterprises, and personal users, and the pricing is negotiable."

"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is more affordable than other solutions."

"The annual licensing fee is $10,000 USD."

"The solution is expensive."

"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"

"It is not too pricey."

"It's more expensive than other solutions and depending on the modules, there can be additional fees."

"F5 bundles up services and the bundle is what you pay for rather than individual components."

"F5 Advanced WAF is not a cost-effective solution. Although they are attempting to reduce prices with their VE and cloud options, they are more expensive than other solutions. The solution is more expensive on average."

"The way we deployed it, I would rate it a four out of five in terms of pricing."

"The pricing is too high."

"I am not sure about pricing but licenses are available on Google."

"It is expensive. Its price should be better. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. Its licensing is also based on the model. There are no additional costs."

"Its price is fair. We have done a couple of deals where they were able to give some kind of discount to the customers. The price was initially high for the customers, but after a couple of negotiations, it came within their budget. They were happy with that."