We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Checkmarx One 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)."Their technical support has been quite good."
"The interface is good."
"Rule groups are valuable."
"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."
"As a basic WAF, it's better than nothing. So if you need something simple out of the box with default features, AWS WAF is good."
"The customized billing is the most valuable feature."
"AWS WAF is a stable solution. The performance of the solution is very good."
"The security firewall plus the features that protect against database injections or scripting,"
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx is the user interface, it is very easy to use. We do not need to configure anything, we only have to scan to see the results."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"The user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"We don't have much control over blocking, because the WAF is managed by AWS."
"One area that could be improved is the DDoS protection."
"They have to do more to improve, to innovate more features. They need to increase the security. It has to be more active in detecting threats."
"I would like to see the addition of more advanced rate-limiting features in the next release. It would be beneficial to extend rate limiting beyond just web servers to the main node level."
"The area of reporting in the product needs to have a proper format."
"On the UI side, I would like it if they could bring back the geolocation view on the corner."
"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."
"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."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"I would like to see the tool’s pricing improved."
"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. 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 Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity.
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.
