We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Symantec Advanced Threat Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, NETSCOUT, Akamai and others in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection."The technical support of Arbor DDoS is good."
"Companies that live from their presence on the internet will get a very high return on investment from Arbor."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is mitigation, which can blackhole the IP."
"The most valuable features include the traffic categorization and control of the traffic. The filtering of the traffic is very precise. When you want to stop some traffic, you precisely stop that traffic."
"It's very flexible and we can easily deploy it to our network. It's very user-friendly. We can do everything via the web interface and troubleshoot easily from the CLI. It's not complicated."
"I like all the features together as a whole."
"The solution is flexible, easy to implement and has an efficient technical support team."
"Endpoint to network protects the line."
"Currently we have 800-plus nodes connected with this solution, without any issues. The solution is scalable."
"The Application Control code and the easy integration are valuable features."
"All of the solution's features are quite valuable for us. We especially like the threat protection it provides."
"It has certainly helped out our audit efforts because we each stay compliant in terms of various security standards."
"You don't have to buy a separate email security platform. You can enable that using their endpoint, and I like that. You don't have to have two agents running on the same box."
"Real-time threat analysis is quick and takes action on threats immediately."
"The incident management on the solution is very good. You get a lot of detailed information about an incident. You also get a lot of documentation in connection with the CVI or integration."
"The support got worse after NETSCOUT acquired Arbor."
"An improvement to Arbor DDoS would be to make evaluation licenses and virtual machines available."
"Sometimes it blocks legitimate traffic. If a legitimate user is trying to access the server continuously, the product suspects that this is a DoS traffic file. That is a case where it needs to improve. It needs machine-learning."
"The regional support here in African could improve, such as marketing and account managers."
"The look and feel of the management console is a little old, excessively simple. If you compare it with other solutions, the look and feel of the console is like you're using technology from five or six years ago. It doesn't show all the technology that is actually behind it. It looks like an older solution, even though it is not."
"When it comes to some false positives, we need to tweak the system from time to time. There is room for improvement when it comes to the actual mitigation because of some false positives."
"There should be an automatic way to configure it to monitor traffic and decide which is an attack and which is not. In Arbor, you need to tweak and set all parameters manually, whereas in Check Point DDoS Protector, you can select the lowest parameters, and over the weeks, Check Point DDoS Protector will learn the traffic and you can then tighten some of the parameters to decide which traffic is regular and which is malicious."
"Arbor's SSL decryption is confusing and needs external cards to be installed in the devices. This is not the best solution from an architectural point of view for protecting HTTPS and every other protocol that is SSL encrypted."
"The security features need to be improved."
"It's a strange situation where the infrastructure of the consumer or customer is behind some kind of firewall and they have always used some kind of customized proxy. In this situation, the ATP has a very tough time to pass the information to the cloud and back. To fix, it requires a more elaborate and complex configuration for that particular case."
"The cloud platform needs to have improvement in terms of the user interface and the different capabilities it has available. It needs to match the other leading next-gen EDR products that are available in the market. That's the reason why we are stepping away from Symantec. Their cloud environment is just generally lacking in comparison to others."
"The product's support services need improvement."
"It also needs network-based threat protection for shared folders and files."
"Entire threat protection is not available for the advanced features."
"There are limits with respect to blocking files by hash value or blocking IP addresses, and these limits should be removed."
"The administration interface needs a lot of improvement. It should be UI based, and simple. They need to improve it. It's pretty much not that friendly compared to what we were using as Bitdefender before. It's okay but is improving, actually."
More Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is ranked 21st in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 14 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Advanced Threat Protection writes "Provides end-to-end antivirus protection and has good stability ". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Trellix Network Detection and Response.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.
