We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiWeb and Imperva Bot Management 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 most valuable feature in this solution is the ability to disseminate between the user entering some wrong value to the field, and a suspicious actor trying to exploit some known vulnerability."
"The support is quite good."
"The most valuable feature is that this product represents a whole solution, including a WAF, and even anti-defacements."
"FortiGate is a stable product."
"When it comes to blocking unknown threats and attacks, I would give it the highest score possible. We first started using AWS and its Web Application Firewalls. That was okay, but it was quite a manual process to keep it up to date, whereas Fortinet is always up to date, and the default rules or the modules that you can turn on are very easy to use."
"The ease of configuration is valuable. We have Azure WAF, we have OCI WAF, and we also have Cloud Armor for GCP, but their configuration isn't very easy. It's pretty simple in FortiWeb, and we can enable or configure whatever we want."
"We were able to protect our web servers from outside attacks."
"The GUI is user-friendly."
"The stability of the product is good since I haven't had any problems with the solution."
"I am impressed with the product's automatic bot mechanism. It also gives us the control to create our own custom bot rules."
"Another area for improvement is logging. When troubleshooting, the logs sometimes take a while to update. We've had people report that some things aren't logged if they're successful. It's a bit hit-and-miss. For example, sometimes people access one of our services, and it's successful, but we don't see that in the logs."
"The initial setup process could be improved."
"We want to see more detailed logging, such as audit logging, as this would significantly enhance the solution's reporting. We currently get some information from logs, but more would be better."
"Most of the deployment is done by our development team because they have some parameters that match the configuration. However, when we initially did the deployment we used a consultant company."
"I had some small problems when I was upgrading firmware. After the upgrade, some of my certificates were deleted."
"It would also be helpful if they could introduce easier reporting. It's good to have those reports that go to C-level management, and Fortinet does provide some graphs, but if they went into some more detail, that would be great."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The Layer 7 DDoS attacks need improvement, it could be better."
"The tool needs to include artificial intelligence and machine learning. It also needs to improve profiling."
"Sometimes, it takes a bit of time for the technical staff of the solution to get back to our company with a resolution for our problems."
Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews while Imperva Bot Management is ranked 4th in Bot Management with 2 reviews. Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0, while Imperva Bot Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Bot Management writes "A product that offers advanced bot detection capabilities and reporting features". Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Imperva Web Application Firewall, whereas Imperva Bot Management is most compared with Cloudflare, AWS WAF, Cequence Security, DataDome Real-Time Bot Protection and F5 Shape Security.
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.