We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and AWS Shield based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Reporting is quite good. There are several pages of reporting on DDoS attacks, and you can find all the details that you need."
"The most valuable features include the traffic categorization and control of the traffic. The filtering of the traffic is very precise. When you want to stop some traffic, you precisely stop that traffic."
"Arbor has the ability to learn and self-create the appropriate profile for each customer."
"It's very flexible and we can easily deploy it to our network. It's very user-friendly. We can do everything via the web interface and troubleshoot easily from the CLI. It's not complicated."
"The solution provides good protection against volumetric DDoS attacks."
"It provides packet capture and we can block or whitelist whichever IPs we need to. Whatever traffic we want to block - and we get IPs from internal teams and from national teams - we block at the Arbor level only, because if it gets to the firewall then firewall bandwidth will be taken."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"We use it not only for DDoS detection and protection, but we also use it for traffic analysis and capacity planning as well. We've also been able to extend the use of it to other security measures within our company, the front-line defense, not only for DDoS, but for any kind of scanning malware that may be picked up. It's also used for outbound attacks, which has helped us mitigate those and lower our bandwidth costs..."
"We have integrated the tool with Active Directory. The most important feature is that it's transparent and doesn't degrade the performance of our solution. Additionally, it's easy to configure, which is crucial for us. It's easy to use and set up and stops attacks on our servers. We haven't encountered any attack problems because the solution stops them in real-time. AWS Shield specifically focuses on defending against denial-of-service attacks, making it a great solution for that type of threat."
"It is integrated with AWS. So, it gives you a good first step."
"The solution's ease of use is the most valuable feature."
"The product has a good mechanism to analyze trends and trigger events."
"I am impressed with the product's multiple features like security."
"When it comes to some false positives, we need to tweak the system from time to time. There is room for improvement when it comes to the actual mitigation because of some false positives."
"It is an expensive product, so there is room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"Arbor's SSL decryption is confusing and needs external cards to be installed in the devices. This is not the best solution from an architectural point of view for protecting HTTPS and every other protocol that is SSL encrypted."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"The upgrade process is mildly complex requiring treatment of the custom embedded OS separately from the application. The correlation of the underling OS to the application version can be easily missed."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"The product is expensive."
"The management of it is a bit hard. If you don't engineer it on the front side, it is hard to go back in and change it. It could be improved in terms of architecture requirements and then ongoing support requirements as a secondary component to it. People tend to set up things like this, and they just expect it to work without the care and feeding that needs to go back into it either from an application team or a network environment team."
"The product needs to improve its logs and reports to make it read better."
"The product should give users more flexibility to customize their security policies according to their requirements."
"We end up having to pay extra for features that AWS adds that we don't need."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while AWS Shield is ranked 6th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 5 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while AWS Shield is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS Shield writes "The solution automatically scales according to traffic, only takes minutes to deploy, and is maintenance-free". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas AWS Shield is most compared with Cloudflare, Cloudflare DDoS, Azure DDoS Protection, Akamai App and API Protector and Fortinet FortiDDoS. See our AWS Shield vs. Arbor DDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.