We performed a comparison between Imperva Web Application Firewall and Rapid7 AppSpider 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)."Imperva Web Application Firewall is a highly stable solution and is very mature."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"The most valuable feature of Imperva, in addition to its strong knowledge base, is its effective protection for web applications."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like signatures to identify attacks like cross-site scripting or SQL injection."
"We can prevent attacks or issues even before they happen."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are DDoS, malware, and the other malicious threat prevention it provides. Additionally, third-party integration is available. You can forward the log for further analysis."
"There are many features. There is ease of deployment. You can deploy the Imperva Web Application Firewall in two to three minutes. After that, you have to set the policies. For setting policies, you have toggle buttons. You can turn something on or off."
"The most valuable feature of Rapid7 AppSpider is the vulnerability reporting data. Additionally, the data is reported in a convenient way rather than seeing them as a PDF. We are able to generate all the reports exactly what we want in a flexible way."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"When it is set up properly, it can do scanning on web apps with multiple engines automatically."
"It is really accurate and the rate of false positives is very low."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"The setup is usually straightforward."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"The initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is very expensive."
"It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"Their portal is very limited and needs improvement."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall can improve by providing better features, such as improved prevention of zero-day attacks. Additionally, it should include a VR meta-analysis."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"They can provide an option to create reports, automatically import the entire report, and create rules again. In a real-life crisis, it would be helpful to be able to import a report and generate security rules from that report. I should be able to create a simple query and import the reports automatically. It can maybe also tell us the format of the report."
"The solution is too slow. It could take a full day to scan. Competitors are much faster."
"Integration could be better."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"AppSpider has some problems with the RAM needed while scanning."
"The product needs to be able to scale for large companies, like ours. We have millions of IP addresses that need to be scanned, and the scalability is not great."
"The dashboard and interface are crucial and they need some improvement."
"The enterprise interface is too simple. It should be more customizable."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews while Rapid7 AppSpider is ranked 25th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 13 reviews. Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Rapid7 AppSpider is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 AppSpider writes "Useful vulnerability reporting data, flexible, and simple implementation". Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door, whereas Rapid7 AppSpider is most compared with Rapid7 InsightAppSec, OWASP Zap, Acunetix, Invicti and Qualys Web Application Scanning.
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.
