Compare Barracuda Web Application Firewall vs. Citrix NetScaler VPX

Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while Citrix NetScaler VPX is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers with 8 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Citrix NetScaler VPX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Gives an understanding of what is happening on your site and any attempts on your source". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler VPX writes "Provides good performance for our virtual apps and desktops". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and HAProxy , whereas Citrix NetScaler VPX is most compared with Citrix NetScaler ADC, F5 BIG-IP and HAProxy .
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: February 2020.
399,540 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 features are the client VPN and content filtering.It's very simple and predictable, because Barracuda provides a vision of the current state of your application. It gives you an understanding of what is happening on your site and any attempts against you at your source. This is the main value that Web Application Firewall provides our company. These aspects are also the main reason for this documentation process.The most valuable feature is the automatic content filtering.The most valuable feature of this solution is the simplicity of configuration.I find the solution very stable.The volumetric DDoS defense is very good because I had a problem with a lot of volumetric DDoS attacks on my servers. After using Barracuda, those attacks have stopped and all the traffic is going smoothly to my servers and the system is working really well.The updating and signature features are my primary use case for the solution. These features are beneficial to my organization.It allows us to scale out to multiple phase servers.

Read more »

The most valuable feature is load balancing.The load balancing is one of the most valuable features.This solution increases the backend network service performance, which is one of the things that we like the most.The program is easy to install and to set up.The solution was very easy to deploy.The solution is very stable. We don't have any downtime or issues of that nature.My customers have told me that the performance of this solution is good.Enables a Web service that offers persistent client-server connections, IP restriction, URL rewrite (such as remove "/assets/" path from client-side URL path), and cache for CSS or JS files... You can easily use the GUI to set up all these requirements on the same network device within 20-30 minutes. (If you do the same steps on CLI, it might take less time.)

Read more »

Cons
The incident reporting needs to be improved.I think the main area for improvement in this product is learning it, as can be seen when comparing it to the F5 web application firewall. F5 has a very powerful learning phase when you start using your web application firewall against your site. Barracuda has something like this, but not with the same functionality from my point of view.The usability of the interface could be improved.I would like to see an improved capacity to store logs so that they will be available for a longer time.The solution could use more reports.I would like to see better controlling of the traffic.I would suggest that someone implementing this product is knowledgeable in the IT field, and with the network needs. It is complex.If you know nothing about networks, then you can't set it up.

Read more »

The WAF component needs to be simplified so that it is easier to use.I will try to migrate all the tools to the cloud because there is more lab and more VPN scalability available in the cloud. It is not available on-premises.Some of our customers have questioned the security of this solution lately, wondering whether it is safe or not, so enhancements in this respect would be good.I think the documentation should be improved.We have issues with the certificates. All authorization processes need certificates, however, every three months we needed to change certificates. This process iss complicated for us because Citrix does not have a not user-friendly interface and does not off user-friendly services. This needs a lot of improvement.The solution is a bit more expensive than some of the available solutions in this region. One solution in particular that I noticed was cheaper was Kemp.I would like to see multifactor authentication added to this solution to improve the security.We had some bugs in the previous firmware. These were not big issues, but more testing on the firmware would be key to happier customers.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The price of this solution is okay.Barracuda costs us $8,000 per year. Barracuda costs $20,000 for a full subscription, when you try to protect multi-site infrastructure, in different geographical zones and for different data centers. If you have only one site, Barracuda will be cheaper.Our licensing fees are paid annually and the cost is between €600 and €800 (approximately $665.00 to $885.00 USD).They have competitive pricing.The pricing is less compared to other web applications.

Read more »

Our licensing fees including technical support are approximately $3,500 USD.The licensing costs for this solution vary depending on which model is being used.Citrix NetScaler VPX is not the cheapest solution out there, but you get what you pay for.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
399,540 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
3,187
Comparisons
2,460
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
395
Avg. Rating
8.6
Views
2,796
Comparisons
2,456
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
364
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Learn
Barracuda Networks
Citrix
Overview

Barracuda Web Application Firewall is the ideal solution for organizations looking to protect web applications from data breaches and defacement. With the Barracuda Web Application Firewall, administrators do not need to wait for clean code or even know how an application works to secure their applications. Organizations can ensure robust security with a Barracuda Web Application Firewall hardware or virtual appliance, deployed either on-premises or in the cloud.

NetScaler VPX provides the complete NetScaler web and application load balancing, secure and remote access, acceleration, security and offload feature set in a simple, easy-to-install virtual appliance. IT organizations, cloud and telecom service providers of any size can deploy NetScaler VPX on industry standard hypervisors—on demand—anywhere in the datacenter.

Offer
Learn more about Barracuda Web Application Firewall
Learn more about Citrix NetScaler VPX
Sample Customers
Oracle, CBS, Pioneer, Hyundai, Publix, Barnes Noble, Calzedonia, Nordstrom, Samsung, NascarArizona State University (ASU)
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company23%
Media Company17%
Comms Service Provider16%
Government9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company43%
Comms Service Provider11%
K 12 Educational Company Or School7%
Government7%
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: February 2020.
399,540 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.