Akamai Kona Site Defender Room for Improvement

Abhay Chrungoo
CTO at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
The WAF features definitely have a lot of room for improvement. A lot of the WAF is really basic. For some products or some of our solutions, we need to run a second layer of more advanced WAF. If it had better layer seven protection then we would not need a second WAF. We use Akamai because it's good at what it does. There are some other things that we would like it to be good at and it's not that good. Quality of protection is our primary concern. We need more advanced layer seven protection, SQL injection, applied scripting, and more confidence in the precision of the system. I think all of those things would be very useful for us. View full review »
Head of Cloud Security & DevSecOps at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved. It takes a while to get from here to there. View full review »
Security Architect at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
* I would like to see some non-related reputation categories. If they had some way of detecting activity on their platform, that would be helpful. * Web request analytics is hard to do between them and us. * There are some issues with pushing configurations across a network. It still takes about 20 minutes and that means to retract it's another 20 minutes. * Also, some of their monitoring dashboards that show us what's hitting us, and with which we analyze, have room for improvement. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai, Imperva, Amazon and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: May 2020.
419,214 professionals have used our research since 2012.