We performed a comparison between Barracuda Web Application Firewall and HAProxy based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."The initial setup is easy."
"The solution ensures layer seven is secure from attacks."
"It's very simple and predictable, because Barracuda provides a vision of the current state of your application. It gives you an understanding of what is happening on your site and any attempts against you at your source. This is the main value that Web Application Firewall provides our company. These aspects are also the main reason for this documentation process."
"It significantly improved our overall web security posture, addressing intrusions and enhancing control over web URLs in our environment."
"It is stable and the performance is good."
"You don't need help from Barracuda to help with the deployment. The deployment is easy."
"The most valuable features are the client VPN and content filtering."
"Setup of this solution is straightforward. It's a stable and scalable solution, with good performance and fast technical support."
"We did not need technical support because the documentation is good."
"We use it as a load balancer for our application servers."
"The ability to handle a sequence of front- and back-ends gives the user the opportunity to send traffic through different services."
"Scalable and inexpensive."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"Stability is number one."
"It solves a problem for me where I can build files, not based on the health of the check, but rather the speed of the check."
"HAProxy Enterprise Edition has been rock solid. We have essentially had no downtime caused by our load balancers in the last 10 months, because they’ve worked so well. Previously, our load balancers caused us multiple hours per year in downtime."
"I would like to see a native multi-cloud cover."
"I think the main area for improvement in this product is learning it, as can be seen when comparing it to the F5 web application firewall. F5 has a very powerful learning phase when you start using your web application firewall against your site. Barracuda has something like this, but not with the same functionality from my point of view."
"I would suggest that someone implementing this product is knowledgeable in the IT field, and with the network needs. It is complex."
"There are issues when upgrading firewalls and we experience different issues across customers."
"Its interface can be better. It is not very friendly."
"The reporting aspect of the solution needs improvement. I don't find that it's very good. They could do some work on it to make it much better. It's not that the reporting isn't secure. It's just that I would prefer to store my reports for an extended period of time. Right now, that's not possible and I'd prefer it if that could change. I also would say that the reports themselves are expensive."
"In the Barracuda Web Application Firewall, there should be more affordable options for WAF as a service."
"Sometimes when we put it in action, we have some blogs that appear as false positives. I think that it's improving. Barracuda should minimize false positives."
"We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files."
"While troubleshooting, we are having some difficulties. There are no issues when it is running; it is stable and very good; however, if there is a troubleshooting issue or an incident occurs, we will have issues because this is open-source."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"I would like to see better search handling, and a user interface, with a complete functional graphical unit"
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"The solution can be improved by controlling TCP behavior better and mandating to clients what the expected outcome must be in order to avoid receiving contestant timeout logs."
"They should introduce one feature that I know many people, including me, are waiting for: HAProxy should have provide hot-swipe for back-end servers. Also, they need a more detailed GUI for monitoring and configuration."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 14th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while HAProxy is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Kemp LoadMaster and Radware Alteon, whereas HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Avi Networks Software Load Balancer.
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.
