We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."It is stable. Period. Will not fail unless you do something wrong."
"It solves a problem for me where I can build files, not based on the health of the check, but rather the speed of the check."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are session control which automatically disconnects users that forget to log off, and the ability to write rules to either allow or block certain file requests."
"The technical support has been, in one word, perfect. Every time I call, I’m on the phone with a representative within five minutes who is highly skilled and willing to help, whether in the case of critical issues or simple advice."
"HAProxy Enterprise Edition has been rock solid. We have essentially had no downtime caused by our load balancers in the last 10 months, because they’ve worked so well. Previously, our load balancers caused us multiple hours per year in downtime."
"The ease of use of the configuration, and great documentation, are the most valuable features for us."
"We don't have a problem with the user interface. it's good."
"Software defined load balancing allows us to dynamically adjust and codify routing decisions. This speeds up development."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"Gives us the ability to trace each connection, and to have logs to be able to differentiate between a positive and a false-positive intruder action."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"Technical support provides good, quick responses."
"On the site security, I can see which countries have incidents, whether it was a robot attack, a real human user, or non-human user."
"On the activity log, I can see the exact details, the visit, and the threat."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"An improvement has been to our website: It increases the speed of our response, the capacity of the site, and optimizes the bandwidth."
"The product does not have any new technologies."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"I would like to evaluate load-balancing algorithms other than round robin and SSL offloading. Also, it would be helpful if I could logically divide the HAProxy load-balancing into multiple entities so that I would install one HA Proxy LB application which could be used for different Web servers for different applications. I am not sure if these features are available."
"We would like to see dynamic ACL and port update support. Our infrastructure relies on randomly allocated ports and this feature would allow us to update without restarting the process."
"Documentation could be improved."
"Improving the documentation with multiple examples and scenarios would be beneficial. Most users encounter similar situations, so having a variety of scenarios readily available on the tool's website would be helpful. For instance, if I were part of the HAProxy team, I'd create a webpage with different scenarios and provide files for each scenario. This way, users wouldn't have to start from scratch every time."
"The basic clustering is not usable in our very specific setup. The clustering is mainly a configuration replication and is great in a case of active-passive usage. In the case of an active-active (or with more than two nodes) where the configuration is not fully identical, it cannot be used as-is."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"The weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."
"Its price could be improved. It is quite expensive. It will be good if we could export the configuration. Currently, to control the configuration, we need to go to each website, which is not very convenient."
"I am not sure if this application has a policy where you can create your custom policy and run it as our firewall. We should have some ability to also create some custom policy, then run it as a firewall."
"Imperva always needs to adjust to new versions of cyber attacks, it needs to be faster, improve the resiliency of the software of the solution."
"It would be better if we were able to manage and apply changes to multiple websites/web applications, and search WAF logs for multiple websites, via the Incapsula dashboard."
"We would like them to hire people in Sweden because it's quite hard when people are sitting in the UK or Belgium because some of the customers really want them to be local."
"Some maintenance must be performed by our IT team."
HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster and Citrix NetScaler, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and F5 Shape Security.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.