We performed a comparison between Imperva DDoS and Radware Alteon 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."Technical support provides good, quick responses."
"Technical support was very helpful."
"Setup was straightforward, very simple. I only entered the domain and Incapsula returned the DNS data that I needed to change for the protection to be configured."
"The complete solution is valuable for everything it delivers and the protection it offers."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"It's very pretty easy to onboard the URL."
"Gives us the ability to trace each connection, and to have logs to be able to differentiate between a positive and a false-positive intruder action."
"Imperva DDoS is fairly stable, and its availability is quite high."
"I like the ADC feature and the global certificate feature."
"The command line interface is simple and very user-friendly."
"The integrated application protection provided by Alteon is very good. It really helps to avoid false positives in some cases. It provides important granularity to avoid a situation in which security or cybersecurity scenarios escape us."
"The interface is easy, it's friendly, and has good alerting."
"A user-friendly and reasonably priced solution."
"The most valuable features of Radware Alteon are the reverse proxy functionality and the SSL offload and hardware."
"With Alteon, the load-balancing options are practically unlimited. We haven't had any issues with offloading, decryption, putting in cookies, or any other load-balancing features. We can check URLs, etc., on the back end for load balancing instead of running a TCP check. We're also doing some certificate stuff on there. Alteon covers all of the standard load-balancing techniques, and we employ most of them daily."
"The most valuable aspect is that it establishes user security."
"There’s nothing that’s missing in terms of features."
"I am not sure if this application has a policy where you can create your custom policy and run it as our firewall. We should have some ability to also create some custom policy, then run it as a firewall."
"Imperva should have more points of presence in Africa."
"Analytics in the area of risk need to be improved to supply more information to the users for creating better environments."
"It would be better if we were able to manage and apply changes to multiple websites/web applications, and search WAF logs for multiple websites, via the Incapsula dashboard."
"The rules surrounding the making of web applications could be improved."
"The log analytics interface within Incapsula isn't really good. For example, if you have to get all logs from there, it's a very cumbersome process."
"The weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."
"We are in the process of updating our version of the solution, so judging what should be improved is difficult. But in some cases, the visualization takes a while, especially for mapping issues."
"We’d like the solution to include more security features in the standard license."
"We are having a difficult time with the security module, and how to implement the Radware security."
"I would like to see future enhancements in security, specifically in threat protection."
"The interface implementation can be improved."
"Support is very important because if we get good support, we'll be able to sell and supply more numbers."
"It can be improved by combining the web application firewall (WAF) facility."
"I would like the solution to display and help visualize the reference map more easily. I would also like to better understand where queries come from and know which users are consulting the application, along with which app."
Imperva DDoS is ranked 18th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 10th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 33 reviews. Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, HAProxy and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Imperva DDoS vs. Radware Alteon 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.