We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Radware DefensePro 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."Using standard BGP, NetFlow and SNMP ensure wide compatibility. There are also peering traffic reports that can help identify upstream peering opportunities. The ATLAS aggregation service allows us to contribute to the global DDoS data and benefit from overall trends."
"In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address."
"The stability is okay and we have not encountered problems with the solution."
"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."
"There are a number of valuable features in this product, like Cloud Signaling and Threat Intelligence feeds."
"Arbor has the ability to learn and self-create the appropriate profile for each customer."
"Companies that live from their presence on the internet will get a very high return on investment from Arbor."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"A valuable feature is the speed of signature updates."
"The DDoS protection that the solution provides is its most valuable feature."
"It has not gone down for a quite long time. It's working fine."
"SSL-based mitigation from DDoS attacks is good from their side. They are capable of preventing SSL-based attacks with certifications and everything loaded onto them."
"The dashboard is the best part, and there is also the ease of operations."
"It has kept us up and operational on a day-to-day basis, without being interrupted by an attack from outside sources."
"As a service provider, we use the SecOps dashboard feature. That's where we check the time of attacks to see if an attack is happening at the moment or if it has already happened... It is very dynamic and helps us know when an attack occurred, how long it lasted, and what type of attack it was."
"Its functionality is very good."
"The upgrade process is mildly complex requiring treatment of the custom embedded OS separately from the application. The correlation of the underling OS to the application version can be easily missed."
"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."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"The following areas need improvement: opening and tracking support tickets, online support resources, software upgrades/updates and replacement media, and event management guidelines."
"The solution needs to enhance its features to compete with other tools."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"With Arbor DDoS, its integration issues with other technologies or other vendors' technologies is an area of concern that could be improved."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"There's room for improvement in the clarity of the feedback provided by the command service in the CLI."
"If they would go to a cloud-based approach, that would give much more flexibility in terms of working with them."
"I would like to see more graphics within the dashboard. Right now, you are required to buy tools in order to have graphical representation for your monitoring."
"I would like to see better implementation of a zero-day attack implementation strategy with self-mitigation."
"They should add artificial intelligence to the platform. It is currently missing the machine learning piece."
"I had some trouble in the registration account prior to deployment, but it was fixed. They were not very fast or responsive, however. It took about one week to resolve the issue."
"The inability to access local technical support during our business hours poses a significant inconvenience."
"Right now, we have DefensePro 6. The only complaint I have is that SSL inspection, when activated, consumes a lot of resources on the machine. We are currently reviewing a possible change to DefensePro X, the new version, which has a separate module with its processors."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Radware DefensePro is ranked 5th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 23 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Radware DefensePro is rated 8.4. 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 Radware DefensePro writes "Regular signature update with good reporting and analytics". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS, A10 Thunder TPS and Fortinet FortiDDoS, whereas Radware DefensePro is most compared with Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Fortinet FortiDDoS, Check Point DDoS Protector and F5 Silverline Managed Services. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Radware DefensePro 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.