AWS WAF vs Imperva Web Application Firewall comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Logo
17,303 views|13,553 comparisons
82% willing to recommend
Imperva Logo
7,938 views|6,351 comparisons
97% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary
Updated on Sep 5, 2022

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.

  • Ease of Deployment: Users of both products report them to be straightforward and simple to set up.
  • Features: Users of both products are generally happy with their flexibility, stability, and scalability.

    AWS WAF users note being particularly satisfied with its stability, agility, and cloud services, but note that the product could be improved by expanding the weightage units of rules.

    Imperva users say they’re impressed with the solution's DDoS, malware, and the other malicious threat prevention. Some users mention wanting there to be more data enrichment capabilities.
  • Pricing: AWS WAF users note that it is reasonably priced and affordable, but a few users note that its pricing model is complicated. Some Imperva users say that it is expensive and higher-priced than competitors.
  • Service and Support: AWS WAF users report fair to good support, whereas Imperva users report excellent service and support.

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.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall Report (Updated: March 2024).
771,212 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most valuable features of AWS WAF are its cloud-native and on-demand.""The most valuable feature is the capability to limit access based on geographical location by restricting specific IP addresses.""The stability of AWS WAF is valuable.""The most valuable feature is the scalability because it automatically scales up or scales down as per our requirements.""The solution is stable.""It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need.""The web solution effectively protects from vulnerabilities and cyber attacks.""The most valuable feature is the way it blocks threats to external applications."

More AWS WAF Pros →

"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all.""There are a number of features that are valuable such as the account takeover and various antivirus features.""The compliance is the most valuable aspect.""Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code.""The most valuable feature of Imperva, in addition to its strong knowledge base, is its effective protection for web applications.""The solution can scale.""Configuration for different application sources is most valuable. We can segregate the traffic that an application is carrying and identify the sizing in Imperva.""The WAF itself has been very valuable to me because it has such a complete range of features. Another reason why I like it is because it also takes care of the total overview of the traffic over the network."

More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pros →

Cons
"They should make the implementation process faster.""I would like to be able to view a graphical deployment map in the user interface that will give me an overview of the configuration and help to determine whether I have missed any steps.""It would be better if AWS WAF were more flexible. For example, if you take a third-party WAF like Imperva, they maintain the rule set, and these rule sets are constantly updated. They push security insights or new rules into the firewall. However, when it comes to AWS, it has a standard set of rules, and only those sets of rules in the application firewalls trigger alerts, block, and manage traffic. Alternative WAFs have something like bot mitigation or bot control within the WAF, but you don't have such things in AWS WAF. I will say there could have been better bot mitigation plans, there could have been better dealer mitigation plans, and there could be better-updated rule sets for every security issue which arises in web applications. In the next release, I would like to see if AWS WAF could take on DDoS protection within itself rather than being in a stand-alone solution like AWS Shield. I would also like a solution like a bot mitigation.""An improvement area would be that it's more of a manual effort when you have to enable rules. That's one of the downsides. If that can be done in an automated way, it would be great. That's a lagging feature currently.""We haven't faced any problems with the solution.""It's a bit difficult to apply the right rules for the right security.""The cost management has room for improvement.""The user experience, the interface, is lacking. Sometimes it's hard to find certain areas that it has alerted on."

More AWS WAF Cons →

"The UI interface needs improvement.""It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size. Learning capability of the device is quite weak.""I would like the solution to improve its support response time.""I don't really use it and therefore can't speak to areas of improvement.""It is complicated to integrate the solution's on-cloud version with other platforms.""There could be some limitations that from the converged infrastructure perspective: when you want to converge with everything and you want Imperva to get there easily because it's not a cloud component. For example, when you want to build servers and you're using OneView to manage your software-defined networks, implementing Imperva right away is not that simple. But if you're doing just a simple cloud infrastructure with servers in there, you're good to go. Also, we are not able, with Imperva, to block by signatures. Imperva by itself needs to be complemented with another service to do URL filtering.""It would be useful if the solution used more intelligence in attack protection. For example, firewalls are to be dependent on the configuration, but if they could have some data science around it the solution would be even better. The profiling of the traffic, and making decisions surrounding that should be intelligence-based, instead of being based on the configuration of the firewall itself.""The initial setup could be simplified. Every time you have to install the solution you have to get in touch with support or somebody that can to do that for you."

More Imperva Web Application Firewall Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It's an annual subscription."
  • "There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
  • "There are different scale options available for WAF."
  • "AWS is not that costly by comparison. They are maybe close to $40 per month. I think it was between $29 or $39."
  • "It has a variable pricing scheme."
  • "We are kind of doing a POC comparison to see what works best. Pricing-wise, AWS is one of the most attractive ones. It is fairly cheap, and we like the pricing part. We're trying to see what makes more sense operation-wise, license-wise, and pricing-wise."
  • "It's quite affordable. It's in the middle."
  • "The pricing should be more affordable, especially as it pertains to small clients."
  • More AWS WAF Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Make sure you understand the way that Imperva charges. It's very affordable. However, I would like to see a package with the Virtual Patching included. You get to do patching separately."
  • "Everybody complains about the price of this solution."
  • "The cost of this solution depends on the platform."
  • "The price of this solution is a little bit high compared to competitors."
  • "There are some licenses that you have to buy to use some features. Its price could be better. Price is always important because, at the end of the day, customers have a budget. If you can meet the budget, you can sell, and if you don't, you cannot sell."
  • "There is a license for this solution and we purchase the license annually with no additional fees."
  • "There are a couple of different licensing models."
  • "The price of Imperva Web Application Firewalls is expensive compared to others."
  • More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    771,212 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Hi Varun I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF… more »
    Top Answer:Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit for… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system.
    Top Answer:For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc. 
    Top Answer:You can have a look to Imperva Cloud WAF, the anti-DDoS mitigation is under 1s and works very well. I observed a lot of DDoS attacks that were well managed (even not seen by the customer) by Imperva… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    17,303
    Comparisons
    13,553
    Reviews
    30
    Average Words per Review
    415
    Rating
    8.4
    Views
    7,938
    Comparisons
    6,351
    Reviews
    16
    Average Words per Review
    374
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    AWS Web Application Firewall
    Learn More
    Overview

    AWS Web Application Firewall (WAF) is a firewall security system that monitors incoming and outgoing traffic for applications and websites based on your pre-defined web security rules. AWS WAF defends applications and websites from common Web attacks that could otherwise damage application performance and availability and compromise security.

    You can create rules in AWS WAF that can include blocking specific HTTP headers, IP addresses, and URI strings. These rules prevent common web exploits, such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting. Once defined, new rules are deployed within seconds, and can easily be tracked so you can monitor their effectiveness via real-time insights. These saved metrics include URIs, IP addresses, and geo locations for each request.

    AWS WAF Features

    Some of the solution's top features include:

    • Web traffic filtering: Get an extra layer of security by creating a centralized set of rules, easily deployable across multiple websites. These rules filter out web traffic based on conditions like HTTP headers, URIs, and IP addresses. This is very helpful for protection against exploits such as SQL injection and cross-site scripting as well as attacks from third-party applications.
    • Bot control: Malicious bot traffic can consume excessive resources and cause downtime. Gain visibility and control over bot traffic with a managed rule group. You can easily block harmful bots, such as scrapers and crawlers, and you can allow common bots, like search engines and status monitors.
    • Fraud prevention: Effectively defend your application against bot attacks by monitoring your application’s login page with a managed rule group that prevents hackers from accessing user accounts using compromised credentials. The managed rule group helps protect against credential stuffing attacks, brute-force login attempts, and other harmful login activities.
    • API for AWS WAF Management: Automatically create and maintain rules and integrate them into your development process.
    • Metrics for real-time visibility: Receive real-time metrics and captures of raw requests with details about geo-locations, IP addresses, URIs, user agents, and referrers. Integrate seamlessly with Amazon CloudWatch to set up custom alarms when events or attacks occur. These metrics provide valuable data intelligence that can be used to create new rules that significantly improve your application protections.
    • Firewall management: AWS Firewall Manager automatically scans and notifies the security team when there is a policy violation, so they can swiftly take action. When new resources are created, your security team can guarantee that they comply with your organization’s security rules.

    Reviews from Real Users

    AWS WAF stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its user-friendly interface and its integration capabilities.

    Kavin K., a security analyst at M2P Fintech, writes, “I believe the most impressive features are integration and ease of use. The best part of AWS WAF is the cloud-native WAF integration. There aren't any hidden deployments or hidden infrastructure which we have to maintain to have AWS WAF. AWS maintains everything; all we have to do is click the button, and WAF will be activated. Any packet coming through the internet will be filtered through.”

    Imperva Web Application Firewall is a versatile solution that protects web applications and databases from various attacks, including DDoS, cross-site scripting, and SQL injection attacks. It offers data security, availability, and access control and can be deployed on-premises or on the cloud. 

    The solution has good security against web attacks and offers advanced bot protection, API security, and mitigation features. Imperva WAF is easy to configure and deploy; it has good customer service and an excellent user interface.

    Sample Customers
    eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
    BlueCross BlueShield, eHarmony, EMF Broadcasting, GE Healthcare, Metro Bank, The Motley Fool, Siemens
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Media Company8%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company17%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company30%
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Insurance Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business37%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise63%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business53%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise31%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    Buyer's Guide
    AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    771,212 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    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 46 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.