We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We use it not only for DDoS detection and protection, but we also use it for traffic analysis and capacity planning as well. We've also been able to extend the use of it to other security measures within our company, the front-line defense, not only for DDoS, but for any kind of scanning malware that may be picked up. It's also used for outbound attacks, which has helped us mitigate those and lower our bandwidth costs..."
"Our customers are very happy when we provide them with the interface... They can check how many attacks they have faced and how many attacks have been blocked."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"The most valuable feature is mitigation, which can blackhole the IP."
"Predefined filters/techniques to easily stop the attacks and start mitigation."
"Arbor has the ability to learn and self-create the appropriate profile for each customer."
"Analytics and its attack mitigation capabilities are valuable features of the solution."
"The auto-mitigation, that signaling feature, where it automatically raises an alarm that a line is under attack, is important. The upstream service provider will then do something to reduce the load on our internet lines. The fact that it's automated means I don't have to sit and always be looking at threats coming through. It does it almost automatically, without any intervention by me."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"It fits our requirements, as well as our budget."
"Imperva DDoS is fairly stable, and its availability is quite high."
"Setup was straightforward, very simple. I only entered the domain and Incapsula returned the DNS data that I needed to change for the protection to be configured."
"The most valuable features for us are the DDoS and Bot."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"An improvement has been to our website: It increases the speed of our response, the capacity of the site, and optimizes the bandwidth."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels."
"They should improve the reporting section and make it a little bit more detailed. I would like to have much better and more detailed reports."
"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."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"An issue which needs to be addressed concerns information I received of attacks on the radar and Arbor, allegedly, not taking any action."
"The implementation should be made easier."
"If we want to see live traffic, we can see do so. But once an attack that lasts for five minutes is done, the data is no longer there. It would be an improvement if we could see recent traffic in the dashboard. We can check and download live traffic, but a past attack, with all the details, such as why it happened and how to mitigate and prevent such future attacks, would be helpful to see."
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"The rules surrounding the making of web applications could be improved."
"Analytics in the area of risk need to be improved to supply more information to the users for creating better environments."
"Some maintenance must be performed by our IT team."
"Imperva now offers add-ons to add functionality, but I would like to see these included in the product, even if it would cost more."
"Incapsula services also provides load balancing services for their service IP address environment. So far, with monitoring their services, the IP address was only changed once."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. 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 Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, A10 Thunder TPS and Nexusguard DDoS Protection, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Radware DefensePro, AWS WAF and Imperva Web Application Firewall. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Imperva DDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
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.