Compare AWS WAF vs. Citrix Web App Firewall

AWS WAF is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while Citrix Web App Firewall is ranked 12th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 4 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 7.8, while Citrix Web App Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "Makes sure files are protected, but the solution should be more proactive in detecting threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Citrix Web App Firewall writes "Runs behind the scenes, in the background and keeps everything running smoothly". AWS WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai Kona Site Defender and Imperva Incapsula, whereas Citrix Web App Firewall is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and F5 BIG-IP. See our AWS WAF vs. Citrix Web App Firewall report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
AWS WAF Logo
6,050 views|4,962 comparisons
Citrix Web App Firewall Logo
2,311 views|1,989 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Citrix Web App Firewall and other solutions. Updated: May 2020.
419,360 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
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.The most valuable feature is the scalability because it automatically scales up or scales down as per our requirements.The security firewall plus the features that protect against database injections or scripting,The ability to take multiple data sets and match those data sets together is the solution's most valuable feature. The data lake that comes with it is very useful because that allows us to match data sets with different configurations that we wouldn't normally be able to match.The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment took about ten minutes or less.The customized billing is the most valuable feature.It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed.It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need.

Read more »

The stability is good. If there is a problem, the load will be shifted to other sites automatically, which has been a good experience for us.The work balancing applications are the most valuable feature.The web application firewall which protects our services on the internet, and then of course services like our ability to provide high availability for the services we are offering are the most valuable features.When our primary link goes down I can still get to my Cisco devices and the NetScaler devices on-prem because of the SDN solution. If the internet connection at one of the branches goes down, we can still route them, they still get internet based on the SDN solution through one of the other sites. They can carry on working.

Read more »

Cons
It's a bit difficult to apply the right rules for the right security.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.For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad botsThe solution is cloud-based, and therefore the billing model that comes with it could be more intuitive, in my opinion. It's very easy to not fully understand how you tag things for billing and then you can quite easily run up a high bill without realizing it. The solution needs to be more intuitive around the tagging system, which enables the billing. Right now, I have a cloud architect that does that on our behalf and it isn't something that a business user could use because it still requires quite a lot of technical knowledge to do effectively.They should work to define more threats, add more security, and make it more compliant with more security companies.In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler.We need more support as we go global.The user experience, the interface, is lacking. Sometimes it's hard to find certain areas that it has alerted on.

Read more »

The reporting is not so good. They don't have an application to connect the logs.The product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement.The user interface could be more friendly. Some wizards and other documentation for administrators, as well as some use cases, helps us to understand the solution.Security could be improved because then I can get rid of my Cisco firewalls. If they improve the security then I could run my security, my proxy, my firewalling and my SDN solution on one device instead of having to have multiple devices.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
There are different scale options available for WAF.There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.It's an annual subscription.

Read more »

We have all the features and functions of Citrix because we have a premium license.For partners, NetScaler is not as expensive price-wise versus F5.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
419,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
6,050
Comparisons
4,962
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
376
Avg. Rating
7.7
Views
2,311
Comparisons
1,989
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
500
Avg. Rating
8.7
Top Comparisons
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Also Known As
AWS Web Application FirewallCitrix NetScaler AppFirewall
Learn
Amazon
Citrix
Overview

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.

Citrix Web App Firewall is a web application firewall (WAF) that protects web applications and sites from both known and unknown attacks, including application-layer and zero-day threats. Despite an ever-evolving threat landscape, Citrix Web App Firewall delivers comprehensive protection without degrading throughput or application response times. Available as a cloud solution or integrated within the Citrix ADC platform, simplified configuration controls further mitigate risk. Our pooled licensing options allow you to grow incrementally and scale on demand.

Offer
Learn more about AWS WAF
Learn more about Citrix Web App Firewall
Sample Customers
eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao InternationalNSS Labs, ICSA Labs
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company35%
Media Company20%
Comms Service Provider12%
K 12 Educational Company Or School6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company55%
Comms Service Provider9%
Wholesaler/Distributor6%
Construction Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Citrix Web App Firewall and other solutions. Updated: May 2020.
419,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.