We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Sucuri 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."We are able to respond quickly and prevent DDoS attacks."
"Arbor DDoS's best feature is that we can put the certificates in, and it will look at layer seven and the encrypted traffic and do the required signaling."
"With real-time packet capture features, you can easily and quickly response."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"It provides packet capture and we can block or whitelist whichever IPs we need to. Whatever traffic we want to block - and we get IPs from internal teams and from national teams - we block at the Arbor level only, because if it gets to the firewall then firewall bandwidth will be taken."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"The stateless device format means that the box is very strong for preventing DDoS attacks."
"The most valuable features include the traffic categorization and control of the traffic. The filtering of the traffic is very precise. When you want to stop some traffic, you precisely stop that traffic."
"Domain name scanning since it allows us to scan all our domain names and determine whether it has malware or if is reported as phishing."
"The initial setup was straightforward. Straight forward because the plugin can simply be installed and then it does its job. It's not complex, there is no learning curve. The online scan is simple, you put in the website address and the scan gives us a report on the browser itself. It's simple to use."
"The most valuable part is the analytics and visualization."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"I use it as a WAF, which is basically a web firewall to monitor and block traffic to our web server."
"It significantly eases the workload and streamlines the initial setup required to protect a website."
"The solution could be more granular to include logs per second and enhanced pipeline monitoring for router licenses."
"The look and feel of the management console is a little old, excessively simple. If you compare it with other solutions, the look and feel of the console is like you're using technology from five or six years ago. It doesn't show all the technology that is actually behind it. It looks like an older solution, even though it is not."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"Sometimes it blocks legitimate traffic. If a legitimate user is trying to access the server continuously, the product suspects that this is a DoS traffic file. That is a case where it needs to improve. It needs machine-learning."
"The implementation should be made easier."
"The support got worse after NETSCOUT acquired Arbor."
"They should improve the reporting section and make it a little bit more detailed. I would like to have much better and more detailed reports."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"In terms of improvement, the cost factor is always there."
"I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
"Sucuri could provide help for specific security alerts in-line instead of requiring users to search for it in the help section."
"The main improvement I would like to see is support for .NET applications. If they could include this feature, I would include more sites in the protection."
"It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Sucuri is ranked 17th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 6 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Sucuri 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 Sucuri writes "Simple solution and good WAF". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Corero and Fortinet FortiDDoS, whereas Sucuri is most compared with Cloudflare, AWS WAF, SiteLock, Comodo cWatch and StackPath WAF. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Sucuri 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.
