We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Sucuri based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information."
"The stability of AWS WAF is valuable."
"The simple configuration and the scalability have been most valuable. We are able to scale across all of our different AWS instances."
"AWS WAF helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection that happen within the retail industry."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the geo-restriction denials and the web ACL."
"AWS WAF is very easy to use and configure on AWS."
"The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is the extra layer of security that I have when connecting to my web applications."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"I use it as a WAF, which is basically a web firewall to monitor and block traffic to our web server."
"The initial setup was straightforward. Straight forward because the plugin can simply be installed and then it does its job. It's not complex, there is no learning curve. The online scan is simple, you put in the website address and the scan gives us a report on the browser itself. It's simple to use."
"The most valuable part is the analytics and visualization."
"It significantly eases the workload and streamlines the initial setup required to protect a website."
"Domain name scanning since it allows us to scan all our domain names and determine whether it has malware or if is reported as phishing."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"The solution could improve by having better rules, they are very basic at the moment. There are more attacks coming and we have to use third-party solutions, such as FIA. The features are not sufficient to prevent all the attacks, such as DDoS. Overall the solution should be more secure."
"The cost must be reduced."
"In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler."
"The solution could be more reliable."
"An improvement area would be that it's more of a manual effort when you have to enable rules. That's one of the downsides. If that can be done in an automated way, it would be great. That's a lagging feature currently."
"While the complexity of the installation can vary from one service to another, overall, I would say that it and the configuration and navigation are somewhat complex."
"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."
"Sucuri could provide help for specific security alerts in-line instead of requiring users to search for it in the help section."
"In terms of improvement, the cost factor is always there."
"I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
"It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"The main improvement I would like to see is support for .NET applications. If they could include this feature, I would include more sites in the protection."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Sucuri is ranked 21st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 6 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Sucuri is rated 8.4. 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 Sucuri writes "Simple solution and good WAF". 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 Sucuri is most compared with Cloudflare, SiteLock, Comodo cWatch, StackPath WAF and Imperva DDoS. See our AWS WAF vs. Sucuri 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.