We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Fortinet FortiDDoS 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 product allows us to check real-time progress, including latency and network activities."
"Our customers are very happy when we provide them with the interface... They can check how many attacks they have faced and how many attacks have been blocked."
"The auto-mitigation, that signaling feature, where it automatically raises an alarm that a line is under attack, is important. The upstream service provider will then do something to reduce the load on our internet lines. The fact that it's automated means I don't have to sit and always be looking at threats coming through. It does it almost automatically, without any intervention by me."
"The quality of the technical support provided by Arbor DDoS is premium."
"Valuable features include simple and centralized management of user access and capabilities, as well as Web 2.0 interactive attack alerting, traffic visualization, and mitigation service control."
"It is fully mitigating the attacks. We've dealt with other ones where we didn't necessarily see that. The detection is very good. It's also very simple to use. Arbor is a single pane of glass, whereas with other solutions you might have a detection pane of glass and then have to go to a separate interface to deal with the mitigation. That single pane of glass makes it much simpler."
"It's very flexible and we can easily deploy it to our network. It's very user-friendly. We can do everything via the web interface and troubleshoot easily from the CLI. It's not complicated."
"In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address."
"This solution can protect Layer 3, Layer 4 and Layer 7 attacks of applications for us."
"It allows me to see all the traffic on my network."
"The product's initial setup phase was really easy."
"The product allows the users to adjust the thresholds."
"We have researched them all, and it's a good solution all around."
"It is a user-friendly product in terms of monitoring and updating policies."
"The solution already has security profiles and it can protect from DDoS attacks and other kinds of attacks."
"Among its key features: Detects and mitigates DDoS attacks at L3 to L7; negligible to zero false-positives; Generates and sends reports without the need for an expensive third-party solution."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"Arbor DDoS could improve out-of-the-box reporting, it could be better."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"On the application layer, they could have a better distributed traffic flow. They could improve that a bit. For network data it is very effective, but the application layer can be improved."
"I would also like more visibility into their bad actor feeds, their fingerprint feeds. We try to be good stewards of the internet, so if there are attacks, or bad actors within our networks, if there were an easier way for us to find them, we could stop them from doing their malicious activity, and at the same time save money."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"Implementation could be better."
"The solution can be a little more user-friendly and it can be more affordable."
"The web interface could be much better."
"There aren't really any aspects of the solution we are unhappy with. It's been a positive experience overall."
"Alerts and reporting features must be improved."
"All the thresholds that need to be configured should be included in the default so that user will not forget or misconfigure."
"The primary area for improvement is the on-premises capacity limit, currently fixed at 10 GB."
"I find that there have been issues in the past year with the solution hanging. It freezes often."
"I would like to see analytics, big data."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Fortinet FortiDDoS is ranked 16th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 12 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Fortinet FortiDDoS is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiDDoS writes "Offers good technical support but has poor scalability". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Corero and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas Fortinet FortiDDoS is most compared with VMware NSX, Radware DefensePro, Fortinet FortiWeb, Edgio Global CDN and Cloudflare. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Fortinet FortiDDoS 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.
