Rodrigo GarciaPhysical Designer at Semtech Corporation
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable feature is the security, making sure that files are protected, preventing unauthorized users from accessing the system."
"The most valuable feature is the way it blocks threats to external applications."
"It's simple, easy to use."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need."
"The customized billing is the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment took about ten minutes or less."
"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."
"We're able to do load balancing and global load balancing. When you marry those two products together, you can do a lot more. We're able to deliver our applications more securely and faster. It has improved our deliverability where we have more service across the shared data centers. We can intelligently reach all of those client connections across all of the servers and do it fairly quickly. It has helped improve our application delivery and performance."
"F5 BIG-IP is used with good applications and functions as an application firewall with additional features. We will not use any feature or any service unless there is a business case and there is a need for implementation."
"Traffic Learning is the most valuable feature."
"Good application firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the proxy."
"iRule feature is useful."
"F5 has many capabilities for load balancing and web application firewall features."
"We always use technical support and the team helps us very well. They're able to effectively find and fix issues and they respond very quickly."
"They have to do more to improve, to innovate more features. They need to increase the security. It has to be more active in detecting threats."
"In a future release I would like to see automation. There's no interaction between the applications and that makes it tedious. We have to do the preparation all over again for each of our other applications."
"The user experience, the interface, is lacking. Sometimes it's hard to find certain areas that it has alerted on."
"We need more support as we go global."
"In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler."
"They should work to define more threats, add more security, and make it more compliant with more security companies."
"The 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."
"For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad bots"
"I would like to see improvement in the manageability and easier setup."
"There are issues with F5 BIG-IP but they are minor issues not affecting production and services. Sometimes the operations and the facility systems fail. However, there is an alert action from the windows. An ordeal for the manager."
"The license terms for "non-commercial" will be a challenge for us."
"The license terms for "non-commercial" will are challenging for us."
"This is a very expensive solution."
"It's a very expensive solution."
"If they made it easier for engineers to get F5 training then it would be better."
"Reporting could be improved and configuration made easier."
"It's an annual subscription."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"There are different scale options available for WAF."
"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."
"They are expensive."
"There are additional costs depending on what modules or what functionality is required."
"F5 pricing is too high, compared to Citrix."
"When we purchased additional licenses for our other locations, we received a discount of between 20% and 25%."
"F5 BIG-IP can be expensive, although there are trial versions available which are helpful to find out if the solution is right for your company."
"The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."
"The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition."
"It is a bit expensive product. Kemp Loadmaster is much cheaper than F5. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. It can be for one year or three years."
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.
AWS WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 14 reviews while F5 BIG-IP is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers with 20 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 7.6, while F5 BIG-IP is rated 8.4. 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 F5 BIG-IP writes "Very stable and easy to use with a good GUI". AWS WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai Kona Site Defender, Imperva Web Application Firewall, Cloudflare and Fortinet FortiWeb, whereas F5 BIG-IP is most compared with Citrix ADC, HAProxy, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, Fortinet FortiWeb and Imperva Web Application Firewall. See our AWS WAF vs. F5 BIG-IP report.
See our list of .
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.