AWS WAF vs Imperva Bot Management comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Logo
17,782 views|13,844 comparisons
82% willing to recommend
Imperva Logo
344 views|336 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Imperva Bot Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF).
To learn more, read our detailed Web Application Firewall (WAF) Report (Updated: April 2024).
767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The ease of deployment of the product is valuable to me.""The product’s availability, ease of configuration, and documentation are valuable.""This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information.""Stable and scalable web application firewall. Setting it up is straightforward.""One common use case is using detection protection for enhancing security models in AWS. Another use case is implementing log analysis and response recovery procedures for email services.""The most valuable features of AWS WAF are its cloud-native and on-demand.""The solution's initial setup process is easy.""Rule groups are valuable."

More AWS WAF Pros →

"The stability of the product is good since I haven't had any problems with the solution.""I am impressed with the product's automatic bot mechanism. It also gives us the control to create our own custom bot rules."

More Imperva Bot Management Pros →

Cons
"The solution's pricing could be improved.""I believe there is a need to move towards real-time analysis with the help of AI and intelligent systems in the future. This would reduce the reliance on manual work and enhance the functionality of detection protection. By incorporating AI-driven data analysis and data science techniques, we can improve the solution's user-friendliness, security compatibility, and accuracy.""There is room for improvement in pricing.""We don't have much control over blocking, because the WAF is managed by AWS.""Technical support for AWS WAF needs improvement.""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.""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."

More AWS WAF Cons →

"Sometimes, it takes a bit of time for the technical staff of the solution to get back to our company with a resolution for our problems.""The tool needs to include artificial intelligence and machine learning. It also needs to improve profiling."

More Imperva Bot Management Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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."
  • "It's quite affordable. It's in the middle."
  • "The pricing should be more affordable, especially as it pertains to small clients."
  • More AWS WAF Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The tool's pricing is good."
  • "I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price."
  • More Imperva Bot Management Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Hi Varun I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF… more »
    Top Answer:Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit for… more »
    Top Answer:The stability of the product is good since I haven't had any problems with the solution.
    Top Answer:I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price. The price of the product also depends on the cost of the tools offered by competitors like… more »
    Top Answer:At the moment, I am okay with the product. I haven't found something that needs to be improved yet. I am not physically busy with any implementations associated with the product, but I will share the… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    17,782
    Comparisons
    13,844
    Reviews
    30
    Average Words per Review
    407
    Rating
    8.5
    4th
    out of 17 in Bot Management
    Views
    344
    Comparisons
    336
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    577
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    AWS Web Application Firewall
    Distil Networks, Distil Bot Detection and Mitigation
    Learn More
    Overview

    AWS Web Application Firewall (WAF) is a firewall security system that monitors incoming and outgoing traffic for applications and websites based on your pre-defined web security rules. AWS WAF defends applications and websites from common Web attacks that could otherwise damage application performance and availability and compromise security.

    You can create rules in AWS WAF that can include blocking specific HTTP headers, IP addresses, and URI strings. These rules prevent common web exploits, such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting. Once defined, new rules are deployed within seconds, and can easily be tracked so you can monitor their effectiveness via real-time insights. These saved metrics include URIs, IP addresses, and geo locations for each request.

    AWS WAF Features

    Some of the solution's top features include:

    • Web traffic filtering: Get an extra layer of security by creating a centralized set of rules, easily deployable across multiple websites. These rules filter out web traffic based on conditions like HTTP headers, URIs, and IP addresses. This is very helpful for protection against exploits such as SQL injection and cross-site scripting as well as attacks from third-party applications.
    • Bot control: Malicious bot traffic can consume excessive resources and cause downtime. Gain visibility and control over bot traffic with a managed rule group. You can easily block harmful bots, such as scrapers and crawlers, and you can allow common bots, like search engines and status monitors.
    • Fraud prevention: Effectively defend your application against bot attacks by monitoring your application’s login page with a managed rule group that prevents hackers from accessing user accounts using compromised credentials. The managed rule group helps protect against credential stuffing attacks, brute-force login attempts, and other harmful login activities.
    • API for AWS WAF Management: Automatically create and maintain rules and integrate them into your development process.
    • Metrics for real-time visibility: Receive real-time metrics and captures of raw requests with details about geo-locations, IP addresses, URIs, user agents, and referrers. Integrate seamlessly with Amazon CloudWatch to set up custom alarms when events or attacks occur. These metrics provide valuable data intelligence that can be used to create new rules that significantly improve your application protections.
    • Firewall management: AWS Firewall Manager automatically scans and notifies the security team when there is a policy violation, so they can swiftly take action. When new resources are created, your security team can guarantee that they comply with your organization’s security rules.

    Reviews from Real Users

    AWS WAF stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its user-friendly interface and its integration capabilities.

    Kavin K., a security analyst at M2P Fintech, writes, “I believe the most impressive features are integration and ease of use. The best part of AWS WAF is the cloud-native WAF integration. There aren't any hidden deployments or hidden infrastructure which we have to maintain to have AWS WAF. AWS maintains everything; all we have to do is click the button, and WAF will be activated. Any packet coming through the internet will be filtered through.”

    Distil Networks is the first easy and accurate way to identify and police malicious website traffic, blocking 99.9% of bad bots without impacting legitimate users. Only 41% of web traffic originates from humans, so it’s imperative to be able to detect and block automated attacks. Bots are the key culprits behind web scraping, online fraud, web application security breaches, content spam, digital ad fraud, and downtime. Distil Networks is purpose built to defeat bad bots that circumvent traditional web application defenses like Web Application Firewalls (WAFs). Distil makes your web applications more secure with API security, real-time threat intelligence, a 24/7 security operations center, and complete visibility and control over human, good bot, and bad bot traffic.
    Sample Customers
    eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
    StubHub, Yelp, Glassdoor, DowJones, The Wall Street Journal, Whitepages, CrunchBase, AOL, Staples, Wayfair, EasyJet, Autotrader, Skyscanner, Orbitz, and Conde Nast, Amadeus, and Thomson Reuters, just to name a few.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Energy/Utilities Company8%
    Media Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company17%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Government6%
    Retailer5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business36%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise44%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise57%
    Buyer's Guide
    Web Application Firewall (WAF)
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: April 2024.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 51 reviews while Imperva Bot Management is ranked 4th in Bot Management with 2 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.2, while Imperva Bot Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Bot Management writes "A product that offers advanced bot detection capabilities and reporting features". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Imperva Web Application Firewall, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Imperva Bot Management is most compared with Cloudflare, Cequence Security, Akamai Bot Manager, DataDome Real-Time Bot Protection and HUMAN BotGuard for Applications.

    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.