Compare AWS WAF vs. R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll)

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Amazon, Fortinet and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2020.
442,764 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 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."

More AWS WAF Pros »

"The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis."

More R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) Pros »

Cons
"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"

More AWS WAF Cons »

"The area that should be improved is licensing."

More R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) 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."

More AWS WAF Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
442,764 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: 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.
Top Answer: The price of the product is fair enough and one of the product's advantages. Their price is good compared to other vendors.
Top Answer: Sometimes it's a bit difficult to check the rules because when you apply a rule, sometimes it's too much and we need to rewrite the rules and make compromises on the rules because it will block too… more »
Top Answer: Imperva is a strong choice, given their security focus and ongoing R&D into the product in areas such as bot management.
Top Answer: The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis.
Top Answer: The area that should be improved is licensing. When using an active/passive cluster, we have to pay 70% of the master appliance and license for the passive server that does not work. Since we know… more »
Ranking
Views
8,265
Comparisons
6,812
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
500
Avg. Rating
7.7
Views
285
Comparisons
222
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
479
Avg. Rating
9.0
Popular Comparisons
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
AWS Web Application FirewallRohde & Schwarz Web Application Firewall, R&S WAF, DenyAll Web Application Security
Learn
Amazon
Rohde & Schwarz
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.

Beyond the basic capabilities of traditional negative and positive security models, DenyAll’s scoring mechanism, user behavior tracking and advanced detection engines deliver best-of-breed security that won’t let you down. None of our customers have made the headlines with security breaches.

Web Services and automated machine-to-machine communications support business processes, internal and with ecosystem partners that are often critical. DenyAll makes it easy to optimize and secure these XML-based data flows, with capabilities found in no other WAF or SOA Gateway.

Offer
Learn more about AWS WAF
Learn more about R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll)
Sample Customers
eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Information Not Available
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Media Company20%
Comms Service Provider15%
Government4%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business21%
Midsize Enterprise36%
Large Enterprise43%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Amazon, Fortinet and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2020.
442,764 professionals have used our research since 2012.
AWS WAF is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 13 reviews while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review. AWS WAF is rated 7.6, while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is rated 9.0. 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 R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) writes "Geo-localization and IP reputation help to keep our clients secure and more available". AWS WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai Kona Site Defender, F5 BIG-IP, Imperva Incapsula and Imperva SecureSphere Web Application Firewall, whereas R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, Fortinet FortiWeb and PerimeterX Bot Defender.

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.