We performed a comparison between Comodo cWatch and Imperva Web Application Firewall 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 FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"It has fewer false positives"
"If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency."
"It has threat intelligence and we are using Incapsula. With threat intelligence, we can separate HTTP and HTTPS traffic. We can use Incapsula to send all the threat intelligence to the WAF."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"Compared to other web application firewalls in the market, Imperva does things in the most accurate way."
"The solution is stable."
"Very scalable and very stable firewall for web applications, with a good interface in its cloud version. Mitigation is its most valuable feature. The technical support for this product is also good."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"I loved the approach of the cloud. The cloud has a lot of new features, like advanced web protection and DDoS protection. If those could also be on-boarded onto the on-prem versions, that would be ideal. They need to pay attention to both deployment options and not just favor one."
"Some of the features should be included in the next release is a file integrating monitoring tool. This feature should be improved."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"It would be helpful to have a "recommended deployment", or even a list of basic features that should either be used or turned on by default."
"There could be some limitations that from the converged infrastructure perspective: when you want to converge with everything and you want Imperva to get there easily because it's not a cloud component. For example, when you want to build servers and you're using OneView to manage your software-defined networks, implementing Imperva right away is not that simple. But if you're doing just a simple cloud infrastructure with servers in there, you're good to go. Also, we are not able, with Imperva, to block by signatures. Imperva by itself needs to be complemented with another service to do URL filtering."
"It is complicated to integrate the solution's on-cloud version with other platforms."
"Their portal is very limited and needs improvement."
"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."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Comodo cWatch is ranked 36th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews. Comodo cWatch is rated 9.6, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Comodo cWatch writes "Excellent security, good encryption, and pretty stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Comodo cWatch is most compared with Cloudflare, Atomic ModSecurity Rules, Sucuri, AWS WAF and SiteLock, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door.
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.
