We performed a comparison between AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: AWS WAF and Imperva Web Application Firewall come out about equal in this comparison. AWS WAF has a slight edge when it comes to pricing, but Imperva Web Application Firewall has a slight edge when it comes to support.
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability to integrate central sets. It protects from intrusion attacks such as scripting and SQL injections."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability because it automatically scales up or scales down as per our requirements."
"AWS has flexibility in terms of WAF rules."
"The product's initial setup phase was very simple."
"We can host any DB or application on the solution."
"The ease of deployment of the product is valuable to me."
"The ability to take multiple data sets and match those data sets together is the solution's most valuable feature. The data lake that comes with it is very useful because that allows us to match data sets with different configurations that we wouldn't normally be able to match."
"The web solution effectively protects from vulnerabilities and cyber attacks."
"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."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable."
"I am impressed with the product's scalability, availability, easy management, and security. We were able to integrate the product with Azure and Sentinel."
"Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code."
"There is a quick switch between any of the the nodes if something goes wrong, where there's a there's an attack against a specific area. The security setup is reasonably easy. It's not a problem to do setups and rules and integrations. And, yeah, just the the back end team is also very willing to insist if there's questions that that we cannot answer or with these questions that we do have"
"The tool's profiling feature maps all the web application directories and related components on the profile directory. It has improved the security of my client's website applications."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"An improvement area would be that it's more of a manual effort when you have to enable rules. That's one of the downsides. If that can be done in an automated way, it would be great. That's a lagging feature currently."
"AWS WAF would be better if it uses AI or machine learning to detect a potential attack or a potential IP that creates an attack even before it happens. I want AWS WAF to capture the IP and automatically write the rule to automate the entire process."
"One area for improvement in AWS WAF could be the limitation on the number of rules, particularly those from third-party sources, within the free tier."
"It is sometimes a lot of work going through the rules and making sure you have everything covered for a use case. It is just the way rules are set and maintained in this solution. Some UI changes will probably be helpful. It is not easy to find the documentation of new features. Documentation not being updated is a common problem with all services, including this one. You have different versions of the console, and the options shown in the documentation are not there. For a new feature, there is probably an announcement about being released, but when it comes out, there is no actual documentation about how to use it. This makes you either go to technical support or community, which probably doesn't have an idea either. The documentation on the cloud should be the latest one. Finding information about a specific event can be a bit challenging. For this solution, not much documentation is available in the community. It could be because it is a new tool. Whenever there is an issue, it is just not that simple to resolve, especially if you don't have premium support. You have pretty much nowhere to look around, and you just need to poke around to try and make it work right."
"The serverless product from AWS WAF could be improved. For example, they have only one serverless series, Lambda, but they should extend and improve it. Additionally, the firewall rules are not very easy to configure."
"The solution can improve its price."
"This solution could be improved if the configuration steps were more specific to WAF, compared to other cloud services."
"In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"I don't really use it and therefore can't speak to areas of improvement."
"It is complicated to integrate the solution's on-cloud version with other platforms."
"The process to upgrade from one version to another can be a lot simpler than it is currently."
"I would like the solution to improve its support response time."
"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."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. 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 Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Fortinet FortiWeb, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall 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.