We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and Radware DefensePro based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The CDN and the WAF features are the best."
"Adaptive stream delivery and WAF protection are valuable."
"It is scalable for DDoS."
"The product has a good user interface."
"Akamai Web Application Protector is a good solution that provides basic web application protection."
"I have contacted the support team of Akamai... I am happy with their responses and answers to my problems."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"All the solution's features are very good."
"It offers valuable insights into ongoing and past attacks, aiding in post-incident analysis and continuous improvement of our cybersecurity strategy."
"This solution is extremely scalable and has the highest level throughput (100G) which complies with Telco deployment."
"With the secure signature feature, the Radware DefensePro is a big assistance. It is a big help to our customers to improve their productivity and performance. The prompt response from the Radware team is definitely increasing in the new era."
"The important features include automated protection and defense against many attacks, it's important that our networks are protected in the Radware cloud."
"The product integrates well with Cisco."
"Technologically simple and effective."
"The DDoS protection that the solution provides is its most valuable feature."
"They have a hybrid model approach if a client wants to go that way."
"The performance of the cloud monitoring tool is low."
"If we talk about application layer attacks, including WAF, CloudFlare is leading. Akamai can focus a bit more on the application layer attacks and how to protect them."
"I do not see any area for improvement. Akamai is already maintaining its own databases for the security concerns, vulnerabilities, and attacks that are there. If anything, they should have a solution in the infrastructure security area as well. They should not be only in cloud cybersecurity; they should also be in infrastructure security."
"Customer support has room for improvement."
"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."
"They are already very flexible, but room for improvement is there. Reports generation could be better and should be improved."
"In terms of precedence of Akamai rules, the last one is implemented. That is the one that is operational. If two rules contradict, the last one is implemented. We had a clash, but it was really tough to find that out. I would like to have a rulebook because, in their architecture documentation, it is not mentioned anywhere that if two rules clash, the last one works, and if it does not work, then what to do. This is something we were debating today with their tech support. With AWS, we get documents for the issues so that they do not occur in the future. Akamai's support and knowledge base needs to be improved."
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved."
"I would like to see better implementation of a zero-day attack implementation strategy with self-mitigation."
"This product would be improved if ongoing live monitoring with dashboards were added."
"I would like to have more granular steps according to protected bandwidth, so the granularity should be better."
"The solution is a little more pricey than other options on the market."
"Right now, we have DefensePro 6. The only complaint I have is that SSL inspection, when activated, consumes a lot of resources on the machine. We are currently reviewing a possible change to DefensePro X, the new version, which has a separate module with its processors."
"This solution may not cover all of the requirements in situations for which I am unfamiliar, and there is always room for improvement."
"I had some trouble in the registration account prior to deployment, but it was fixed. They were not very fast or responsive, however. It took about one week to resolve the issue."
"The inability to access local technical support during our business hours poses a significant inconvenience."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 3rd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 27 reviews while Radware DefensePro is ranked 5th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 21 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Radware DefensePro is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware DefensePro writes "Regular signature update with good reporting and analytics". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and AWS Shield, whereas Radware DefensePro is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Fortinet FortiDDoS and Check Point DDoS Protector. See our Akamai App and API Protector vs. Radware DefensePro report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.
