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 stability of AWS WAF is valuable."
"We can host any DB or application on the solution."
"The most valuable features of AWS WAF are its cloud-native and on-demand."
"The access instruction feature is the most valuable. This is what we use the most."
"The most valuable feature is that it is very easy to configure. It just takes a couple of minutes."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"AWS has flexibility in terms of WAF rules."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"Configuration for different application sources is most valuable. We can segregate the traffic that an application is carrying and identify the sizing in Imperva."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"The most valuable features of Imperva Web Application Firewall are the monitoring of databases and the dashboards are easy to understand."
"I am impressed with the product's scalability, availability, easy management, and security. We were able to integrate the product with Azure and Sentinel."
"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"
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is a highly stable solution and is very mature."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"The solution can improve its price."
"The area of reporting in the product needs to have a proper format."
"While the complexity of the installation can vary from one service to another, overall, I would say that it and the configuration and navigation are somewhat complex."
"In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler."
"For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad bots"
"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 product should improve the DDoS-related features."
"The setup is complicated."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"Sometimes our web application firewall will slow down."
"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 signature updates could be faster. Sometimes we have to upload signatures to the Imperva portal for checking and analysis before we can use them."
"Some of the features should be included in the next release is a file integrating monitoring tool. This feature should be improved."
"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."
"It's a complicated tool to keep."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
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 47 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.