We performed a comparison between Azure Web Application Firewall and Imperva Web Application Firewall 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."It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"We can prevent attacks or issues even before they happen."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code."
"Imperva has a complete picture of how the applications are utilizing it. It is handy. DDoS is good. It has an internally managed database. It is very easy to integrate. We have integrated it with SIEM services."
"Very intuitive and granular configuration - It does not require much time, or advanced knowledge, for configuration and maintenance."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable."
"It mitigates all of the availabilities of risks around web applications."
"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"The management can be improved."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"The tool's UI is complicated. It would be best to have a more accessible UI dashboard to make the job easier."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the console by making it easier to use."
"It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that."
"An improvement for Imperva WAF would be to reduce the number of false positives and create more strong use cases based on AI/ML or behavioral analytics."
"Sometimes, support tickets don't get addressed quickly."
"I am looking for more data enrichment. We should have the ability to add our own custom data to the system, to the live traffic."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
More Azure Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked 12th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 9 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 47 reviews. Azure Web Application Firewall is rated 8.4, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Azure Web Application Firewall writes "It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Azure Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door, Azure Firewall and Azure DDoS Protection, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Radware Alteon. See our Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall 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.