We performed a comparison between Cloudflare and Corero 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."Cloudflare is a security SaaS provider that provides security and protects us from any application layer attack."
"Centralized, full-featured DNS."
"The DDoS protection is the most valuable aspect of the solution."
"The solution provides good load balancing and protection against DDoS attacks."
"Cloudflare offers CDN and DDoS protection. We have the front end, API, and database in how you structure applications."
"New and innovative way to protect the client's data."
"When using services like Heroku, Cloudflare is very useful for CNAME flattening. I also use it for their end-to-end SSL with TLS authentication on nginx for securing servers."
"The technical support is good."
"It is an agnostic and transparent inline platform, which means that the maximum visibility of the symmetric and asymmetric traffic is available, even allowing bidirectional detection of the attack."
"This is a hybrid solution."
"The DDoS protection features are valuable."
"SmartWall devices occupy only one-fourth of the width of a rack unit, making them very easy to install."
"It is a good solution. Its vendor support is the most valuable. It is simple and works well if you have Juniper MX routers."
"The most valuable feature of Corero is its ability to handle smaller attacks in terms of the amount of volume and time. You can handle almost 100 perfect of the attacks locally."
"There should be a specific price list for enterprise-level customers."
"In the last two years, there has been a certain amount of downtime when using the VDM."
"The timing aspect can lead to it being considered overpriced. This is a particular concern we have with Cloudflare, as they may struggle with accurately detecting the client."
"It should have easier documentation for the configuration. It's very technical and people who aren't technical should also be able to do the configuration."
"It would be beneficial for us if Cloudflare could offer a scrubbing solution. This would involve taking a snapshot of my website and keeping it live during a DDoS attack, ensuring uninterrupted service for our users. DDoS attacks are typically short in duration, and having Cloudflare maintain the site's availability from its secure network would enhance the overall user experience. I would appreciate it if Cloudflare could consider implementing this feature. Many organizations already utilize similar capabilities in their CDN platforms, where a static snapshot of the web page is displayed during DDoS attacks. In terms of features, Cloudflare needs to enhance its resilience and stay more focused on adopting new technologies. For instance, solutions like F5 XC Box, Access Solution, and Distributed Cloud Solution have impressive features, and Cloudflare should strive to match and exceed those capabilities. There's a need for improvement in areas like AI-based DDoS attacks and Layer 7 WAF features. Cloudflare should prioritize enhancements in areas such as behavioral DDoS and protection against SQL injection attacks, considering the prevalent trend of public exposure to the internet for business reasons. Overall, Cloudflare needs to invest more in advancing its feature set."
"Cloudflare's console should be made more user-friendly."
"We're facing challenges due to an upgrade in the machine learning model. The problem arises from some users abusing the APIs, resulting in an influx of suspicious traffic. Cloudflare's learning model mistakenly identifies this traffic as human. Consequently, it assigns it a higher trust score, akin to legitimate human traffic, causing complications in our architecture. Previously, such traffic would have been categorized as suspicious, enabling us to apply appropriate blocking rules. However, we encounter difficulties distinguishing between genuine and suspicious traffic with the new categorization. Despite these challenges, overall, Cloudflare remains the preferred solution compared to Azure, AWS CloudFront, and Google Cloud Armor."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The approach taken by Corero is to partner with other organizations in order to address volumetric attacks that cannot be handled by the hardware installed in the infrastructure. Corero does not have a solution for these attacks, so they are looking for partners to help them manage them. This approach is supplemented by local hardware, but the main focus is on the partnerships. It would be beneficial to have a more complete solution."
"Lacks international presence."
"It could use support in Spanish."
"Juniper is known in our country, but it is not very popular. There is also not enough information about Corero. Our enterprise and financial sectors don't know about this solution. They need to provide more information and do more marketing for this solution in our country."
"The product must provide more Layer 7 capabilities."
Cloudflare is ranked 1st in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 56 reviews while Corero is ranked 17th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 5 reviews. Cloudflare is rated 8.4, while Corero is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cloudflare writes "It's easy to set up because you point the DNS to it, and it's working in under 15 minutes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Corero writes "Effect local attack handling, intuitive interface, and scalable". Cloudflare is most compared with Akamai, Azure Front Door, Imperva DDoS, AWS Shield and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, whereas Corero is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Radware Cloud DDoS Protection Service, Radware DefensePro, Lumen DDoS Mitigation and Nexusguard DDoS Protection. See our Cloudflare vs. Corero 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.
