We performed a comparison between Azure Web Application Firewall and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"Technical support provides good, quick responses."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"Technical support was very helpful."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"It's very pretty easy to onboard the URL."
"The complete solution is valuable for everything it delivers and the protection it offers."
"The management can be improved."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"Users would benefit from better documentation. There is official documentation, but sometimes we need more detail. We have some use cases that are not so run of the mill. It would be great if there was a knowledge base that we could go to for more answers."
"The rules surrounding the making of web applications could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve Integration with third parties for their on-prem deployment models. The integration is not that good yet."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"Its price could be improved. It is quite expensive. It will be good if we could export the configuration. Currently, to control the configuration, we need to go to each website, which is not very convenient."
"Certificate management could be improved."
"Imperva DDoS does not provide version control."
More Azure Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked 12th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 9 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 18th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews. Azure Web Application Firewall is rated 8.4, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Web Application Firewall writes "It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". Azure Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door, Azure Firewall and F5 Advanced WAF, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF. See our Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Imperva DDoS 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.