We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The security firewall plus the features that protect against database injections or scripting,"
"The most valuable feature is the scalability because it automatically scales up or scales down as per our requirements."
"The most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"AWS has flexibility in terms of WAF rules."
"This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information."
"Its best feature is that it is on the cloud and does not require local hardware resources."
"The access instruction feature is the most valuable. This is what we use the most."
"The most valuable features are the geo-restriction denials and the web ACL."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad bots"
"I would like to be able to view a graphical deployment map in the user interface that will give me an overview of the configuration and help to determine whether I have missed any steps."
"It's a bit difficult to apply the right rules for the right security."
"When users choose the free service, there isn't great support available to them."
"The technical support does not respond to bugs in the coding of the product."
"The pricing model is complicated."
"The setup is complicated."
"It is sometimes a lot of work going through the rules and making sure you have everything covered for a use case. It is just the way rules are set and maintained in this solution. Some UI changes will probably be helpful. It is not easy to find the documentation of new features. Documentation not being updated is a common problem with all services, including this one. You have different versions of the console, and the options shown in the documentation are not there. For a new feature, there is probably an announcement about being released, but when it comes out, there is no actual documentation about how to use it. This makes you either go to technical support or community, which probably doesn't have an idea either. The documentation on the cloud should be the latest one. Finding information about a specific event can be a bit challenging. For this solution, not much documentation is available in the community. It could be because it is a new tool. Whenever there is an issue, it is just not that simple to resolve, especially if you don't have premium support. You have pretty much nowhere to look around, and you just need to poke around to try and make it work right."
"The management can be improved."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"AWS is not that costly by comparison. They are maybe close to $40 per month. I think it was between $29 or $39."
"It has a variable pricing scheme."
"We are kind of doing a POC comparison to see what works best. Pricing-wise, AWS is one of the most attractive ones. It is fairly cheap, and we like the pricing part. We're trying to see what makes more sense operation-wise, license-wise, and pricing-wise."
"It's quite affordable. It's in the middle."
"The pricing should be more affordable, especially as it pertains to small clients."
"We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft and the pricing is good."
"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."
"The price of the solution depends on your architecture and how you manage it. You can control the cost in Azure quite well. The costs do not directly correlate to expenses in the features we are using."
AWS WAF is a web application firewall that helps protect your web applications from common web exploits that could affect application availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources. AWS WAF gives you control over which traffic to allow or block to your web applications by defining customizable web security rules. You can use AWS WAF to create custom rules that block common attack patterns, such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting, and rules that are designed for your specific application. New rules can be deployed within minutes, letting you respond quickly to changing traffic patterns. Also, AWS WAF includes a full-featured API that you can use to automate the creation, deployment, and maintenance of web security rules.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) provides centralized protection of your web applications from common exploits and vulnerabilities. Web applications are increasingly targeted by malicious attacks that exploit commonly known vulnerabilities. SQL injection and cross-site scripting are among the most common attacks.
AWS WAF is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked 21st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 4 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 7.8, while Azure Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "Use this product to make it possible to deploy web applications securely". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure Web Application Firewall writes "Straightforward to set up, brilliant support, and it allows us to publish applications behind the firewall". AWS WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Imperva Web Application Firewall, Akamai Kona Site Defender, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Barracuda Web Application Firewall, whereas Azure Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Imperva Incapsula and Signal Sciences. See our AWS WAF vs. Azure 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.