We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service 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."The customized billing is the most valuable feature."
"Its best feature is that it is on the cloud and does not require local hardware resources."
"Their technical support has been quite good."
"The solution is stable."
"The agility is great for us in terms of cloud services in general."
"It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need."
"The most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"One common use case is using detection protection for enhancing security models in AWS. Another use case is implementing log analysis and response recovery procedures for email services."
"The product's bot protection feature is valuable for our company."
"The most valuable features of the solution are it is plug and play, has automated policies, a simple configuration, and is easy to create rules."
"It provides an ease of policy management."
"The solution can be used for threat prevention or as a cloud-to-cloud backup system"
"I like its ability to identify known attacks, including DDOS attacks. It's valuable because software must be able to stop known attacks. Application attacks are evolving all the time. When it comes to software-as-a-service, we need to have software that knows about all the latest attacks. It should also protect against major unknown attacks."
"One area that could be improved is the DDoS protection."
"We need more support as we go global."
"I believe there is a need to move towards real-time analysis with the help of AI and intelligent systems in the future. This would reduce the reliance on manual work and enhance the functionality of detection protection. By incorporating AI-driven data analysis and data science techniques, we can improve the solution's user-friendliness, security compatibility, and accuracy."
"They should work to define more threats, add more security, and make it more compliant with more security companies."
"They have to do more to improve, to innovate more features. They need to increase the security. It has to be more active in detecting threats."
"For uniformity, AWS has a well-accepted framework. However, it'll be better for us if we could have some more documented guidelines on how the specific business should be structured and the roles that the cloud recommends."
"The technical support does not respond to bugs in the coding of the product."
"We don't have much control over blocking, because the WAF is managed by AWS."
"One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy."
"The solution can improve by bundling Security Operation Center (SOC) with the WAF-as-a-Service, it would provide a lot more value to customers."
"We found it a bit slow when accessing it through the web browser. The URL also exposed the user name and the hashed password. When I log into my Barracuda WAF user portal, I could see the username and the hashed password on the URL itself. So, it is not very secure, and it is important to take that off."
"The stability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It's a very specific solution that is only requested for a customer's web code or their global IT policy."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is ranked 29th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 5 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service writes "Easy to install platform with valuable policy management features ". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our AWS WAF vs. Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service 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.