We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and AWS WAF 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."Traffic filtering and WAF are valuable."
"The product has a good UI."
"Akamai Web Application Protector is a good solution that provides basic web application protection."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"The solution can scale extremely well."
"They have a fantastic tool for analyzing and viewing your traffic."
"The support that we got from their technical team has been fantastic. I have never experienced this level of support from other CDN providers."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"AWS WAF is very easy to use and configure on AWS."
"The most valuable feature is the security, making sure that files are protected, preventing unauthorized users from accessing the system."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability because it automatically scales up or scales down as per our requirements."
"AWS has flexibility in terms of WAF rules."
"It's simple, easy to use."
"The customizable features are good."
"Stable and scalable web application firewall. Setting it up is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system."
"In terms of precedence of Akamai rules, the last one is implemented. That is the one that is operational. If two rules contradict, the last one is implemented. We had a clash, but it was really tough to find that out. I would like to have a rulebook because, in their architecture documentation, it is not mentioned anywhere that if two rules clash, the last one works, and if it does not work, then what to do. This is something we were debating today with their tech support. With AWS, we get documents for the issues so that they do not occur in the future. Akamai's support and knowledge base needs to be improved."
"It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."
"The custom rules must be improved."
"If we talk about application layer attacks, including WAF, CloudFlare is leading. Akamai can focus a bit more on the application layer attacks and how to protect them."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"One area where Akamai can improve is the captcha part. Cloudflare provides a captcha if there are a certain number of threats. For example, I can assign that if there are 10 requests within a second from a single IP, it should send a captcha to the user. The user should fill in the captcha, and only after that, the user should be able to access our website. This captcha feature should be built into Bot Manager. I love this captcha feature of Cloudflare."
"The default content policy available in the tool is not very strong compared to the competitors."
"The product should improve the DDoS-related features."
"The solution can improve its price."
"I believe there is a need to move towards real-time analysis with the help of AI and intelligent systems in the future. This would reduce the reliance on manual work and enhance the functionality of detection protection. By incorporating AI-driven data analysis and data science techniques, we can improve the solution's user-friendliness, security compatibility, and accuracy."
"The serverless product from AWS WAF could be improved. For example, they have only one serverless series, Lambda, but they should extend and improve it. Additionally, the firewall rules are not very easy to configure."
"The product must provide more features."
"AWS WAF should provide better protection to its users, and the security features need to improve."
"The technical support does not respond to bugs in the coding of the product."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while AWS WAF is rated 8.0. 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 AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Prolexic, AWS Shield and Arbor DDoS, whereas AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare. See our AWS WAF vs. Akamai App and API Protector 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.