Compare Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Barracuda Web Application Firewall

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Barracuda Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
534,468 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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 feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it.""The CDN and the WAF features are the best.""The solution can scale extremely well.""The features are powerful and better than F5.""I like that the charges are all based on usage and labor costs. For the time that we spend onboarding almost 252020 FQDN, Akamai charges us only for the traffic usage, but it's only charging us for the labor costs for onboarding."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Pros »

"It's very simple and predictable, because Barracuda provides a vision of the current state of your application. It gives you an understanding of what is happening on your site and any attempts against you at your source. This is the main value that Web Application Firewall provides our company. These aspects are also the main reason for this documentation process.""The most valuable features are the client VPN and content filtering.""You don't need help from Barracuda to help with the deployment. The deployment is easy.""The stability of the solution is good. I don't think we've experienced bugs, crashes, or glitches.""The solution offers multiple security features. There are machine learning features and great URL encryption. It also offers multi-protocol support against DDoS attacks.""Its recommendation about the probabilities on the website is great. It also has free probability managers for the website, which is really helpful. The protection engine, signature-based protection behavior, and analysis features are also great. It also has an ATP module for sandbox scanning and behavior analysis for file uploads.""The initial setup is pretty straightforward, especially if you enlist assistance.""We use Barracuda to protect the application. That's the main feature we use it for."

More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pros »

Cons
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved.""Could integrate more features for each security.""The pricing could be reduced a bit.""Support and the pricing need to improve.""It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Cons »

"I think the main area for improvement in this product is learning it, as can be seen when comparing it to the F5 web application firewall. F5 has a very powerful learning phase when you start using your web application firewall against your site. Barracuda has something like this, but not with the same functionality from my point of view.""The incident reporting needs to be improved.""They could improve their performance, support, and their upgrades. Their updates used to be good. Their improvements were right on the money but nowadays, the updates are minor.""The reporting aspect of the solution needs improvement. I don't find that it's very good. They could do some work on it to make it much better. It's not that the reporting isn't secure. It's just that I would prefer to store my reports for an extended period of time. Right now, that's not possible and I'd prefer it if that could change. I also would say that the reports themselves are expensive.""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.""Its interface can be better. It is not very friendly.""We've had some blocks of the application and some false positives.""Sometimes when we put it in action, we have some blogs that appear as false positives. I think that it's improving. Barracuda should minimize false positives."

More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Akamai is very expensive.""There is no license at all for Akamai. They are going to charge us only for the usage."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Barracuda costs us $8,000 per year. Barracuda costs $20,000 for a full subscription, when you try to protect multi-site infrastructure, in different geographical zones and for different data centers. If you have only one site, Barracuda will be cheaper.""The price of this solution is okay.""The price of the solution is a little expensive. There is a license for this solution and it can be purchased every one, two, or five years.""While I would have to check on the price of the solution, I feel it to be okay and it matches the market price.""The price is reasonable, more so than other products."

More Barracuda 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.
534,468 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The solution can scale extremely well.
Top Answer: The product really isn't very user-friendly. They could improve it so that it's easier for their customers to navigate and use. From a management perspective, it's difficult. Managing these rules with… more »
Top Answer: We primarily use the solution as an application firewall.
Top Answer: Barracuda Web Application Firewall provides optimized performance, a user-friendly environment, helpful dashboards, and is simple to use.
Top Answer: Our clients are using the solution for internal banking software and website protection.
Top Answer: The price of the solution is a little expensive. There is a license for this solution and it can be purchased every one, two, or five years.
Ranking
Views
8,745
Comparisons
6,883
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
396
Rating
8.2
Views
4,989
Comparisons
3,916
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
484
Rating
7.8
Comparisons
Also Known As
Kona Site Defender, Kona
Learn More
Overview
Akamai's Kona Site Defender extends security beyond the data center while maintaining site performance and availability in the face of fast-changing threats. It leverages the power of the Akamai Intelligent Platform to detect, identify and mitigate Denial-of-Service (DoS) and Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks before they ever reach the origin.

Barracuda Web Application Firewall is the ideal solution for organizations looking to protect web applications from data breaches and defacement. With the Barracuda Web Application Firewall, administrators do not need to wait for clean code or even know how an application works to secure their applications. Organizations can ensure robust security with a Barracuda Web Application Firewall hardware or virtual appliance, deployed either on-premises or in the cloud.

Offer
Learn more about Akamai Kona Site Defender
Learn more about Barracuda Web Application Firewall
Sample Customers
AvidMobile, itBit
Oracle, CBS, Pioneer, Hyundai, Publix, Barnes Noble, Calzedonia, Nordstrom, Samsung, Nascar
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Financial Services Firm14%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business33%
Large Enterprise67%
REVIEWERS
Small Business68%
Midsize Enterprise5%
Large Enterprise26%
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Barracuda Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
534,468 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Akamai Kona Site Defender is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 5 reviews while Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 13 reviews. Akamai Kona Site Defender is rated 8.2, while Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Akamai Kona Site Defender writes "Great technical support, scales extremely well, and is very stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Gives an understanding of what is happening on your site and any attempts on your source". Akamai Kona Site Defender is most compared with Akamai Prolexic Routed, AWS WAF, F5 Shape Security, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare, whereas Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, HAProxy and Radware AppWall. See our Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Barracuda 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.