Compare Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. F5 Advanced WAF

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. F5 Advanced WAF and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
521,817 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
"It enables us to move faster with new products because we have this layer of protection set up in our infrastructure.""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."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Pros »

"I definitely recommend this solution because of the time you save on analysis.""The solution isn't too expensive. The license allows you to license what you need and leave out what you don't need.""This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most.""The anti-bot protection is the solution's most valuable feature. Safe-guard or credential staffing are also useful features.""This solution is an enterprise-class firewall that provides both load-balancing and security.""Good dashboard and reporting.""In terms of F5 Advanced WAF's most valuable features, I would definitely say its stability. F5 is one the most stable products. Either as the load balancer or the web application firewall, it is very stable.""I like all of the features, but the main one is the attack signatures."

More F5 Advanced WAF Pros »

Cons
"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.""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."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Cons »

"One thing that can be improved, is to increase the quantity over predefine policy.""The solution is tedious. It takes a lot of discrete settings so one needs to get detailed and granular when they use the solution. It takes you a whole lot of energy and concentration to configure. It needs to be much more straight-forward, like other web solutions.""I would not expect traffic details to pass through the web application firewall across the length of the whole application. I think that there is a web application where it can let the application function without traffic going in into the WAF.""The solution's dashboard could be improved. When you're moving from policy to policy, the logs and the integration of the logs in other systems aren't straightforward.""This solution can be made more user-friendly.""Scalability could be improved.""I would say their graphical interface, the GUI. I don't like the GUI as much as before.""The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."

More F5 Advanced WAF Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
"After buying the program, you just pay for the support every year.""Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis.""It's more expensive than other solutions and depending on the modules, there can be additional fees.""F5 bundles up services and the bundle is what you pay for rather than individual components.""Its price is fair. We have done a couple of deals where they were able to give some kind of discount to the customers. The price was initially high for the customers, but after a couple of negotiations, it came within their budget. They were happy with that.""There are various plans available for Fortinet FortiWeb Cloud WAF as a Service, including a trial version.""It is expensive. Its price should be better. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. Its licensing is also based on the model. There are no additional costs."

More F5 Advanced WAF Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
521,817 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: The web application firewall itself is most valuable. It provides positive security and negative security. In negative security, it blocks a task such as cross-site scripting, code injection, etc. In… more »
Top Answer: There are various plans available for Fortinet FortiWeb Cloud WAF as a Service, including a trial version. You are only charged by the total data transferred, and there are hourly charges for the… more »
Top Answer: Its price should be better. It is expensive.
Ranking
Views
8,952
Comparisons
6,958
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
480
Rating
8.3
Views
5,352
Comparisons
3,842
Reviews
16
Average Words per Review
576
Rating
8.6
Popular 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.

At F5, we give our customers the freedom to securely deliver every app, anywhere—with confidence. All F5 products are highly programmable and integrate into any environment, whether on premises or in any cloud. To date, 48 of the Fortune 50 companies rely on F5 to deliver apps that customers and employees can securely access at any time, on any device, from any location.

Offer
Learn more about Akamai Kona Site Defender
Learn more about F5 Advanced WAF
Sample Customers
AvidMobile, itBit
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Financial Services Firm14%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm33%
Non Tech Company22%
Energy/Utilities Company11%
Printing Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider27%
Financial Services Firm8%
Energy/Utilities Company5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business29%
Large Enterprise71%
REVIEWERS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise39%
Large Enterprise33%
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. F5 Advanced WAF and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
521,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Akamai Kona Site Defender is ranked 10th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 4 reviews while F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 14 reviews. Akamai Kona Site Defender is rated 8.2, while F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6. 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 F5 Advanced WAF writes "It is very stable as as a load balancer or a web application firewall". Akamai Kona Site Defender is most compared with Akamai Prolexic Routed, AWS WAF, F5 Shape Security, Cloudflare and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, whereas F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb, NGINX App Protect, Cloudflare and Fastly. See our Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. F5 Advanced WAF 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.