We performed a comparison between Barracuda Web Application Firewall and Loadbalancer.org 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)."We only need one subscription to be protected against both active DDoS and offline DDoS attacks."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Parameter Protection is a valuable feature."
"This product gives us visibility into what is going on in two servers, including connections and sessions, real-time alerts, very good reporting, and KPIs. It makes managing security of a critical server very easy, with a friendly GUI."
"The solution has been quite stable. It's reliable."
"It allows us to scale out to multiple phase servers."
"I find the solution very stable."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, especially if you enlist assistance."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"Most important for us that it makes sure that the load is distributed and that we always have access to the end servers."
"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
"Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed."
"With basic network knowledge, our required system functionality can be configured and maintained."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"If you know nothing about networks, then you can't set it up."
"The documentation is lacking. It's not like what you'd get if you were using Juniper or Cisco. They need to expand on it and make it more useful."
"The GUI needs to be improved because it sometimes hangs and needs to be restarted."
"Barracuda Web Application Firewall’s scalability needs improvement."
"While the UI is good, it can get a little bit complicated."
"It would be better if their updates would be released annually."
"The platform's pricing needs improvement."
"In the Barracuda Web Application Firewall, there should be more affordable options for WAF as a service."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"They're mostly designed to balance a particular type of traffic. I wanted to load balance DNS, and they just don't do it the way that we wanted to. So they're not used as DNS load balancers."
"If I have to say something, I suppose they could add an automated configuration backup to an FTP location (or something similar) so you don’t have to manually do it. I don’t see this as a problem, of course, as the configuration rarely changes and we only need one backup, but maybe for other users that feature would be handy."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"An area for improvement in Loadbalancer.org is that sometimes it works fine, but sometimes, it has issues. The setup for Loadbalancer.org is also complex, so that's another area for improvement."
"The interface from Loadbalancer.org should be improved."
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, HAProxy and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas Loadbalancer.org is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, Fortinet FortiADC, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Kemp LoadMaster.
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.