Compare Barracuda Web Application Firewall vs. Citrix NetScaler VPX

Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 9 reviews while Citrix NetScaler VPX is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers with 1 review. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Citrix NetScaler VPX is rated 9.0. 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 "Rewriting and redirection are key features for us". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Fortinet FortiWeb, 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, Imperva, Cloudflare and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2019.
372,374 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
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.We run it with no downtime, because it has good support.

Read more »

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.)If you need PCI-compliance and have high security requirements, WAF is the most valuable feature. If you need to monitor your load-balancing services with complex types of monitoring, make sure everything is alright, and load balancing is important, Content Switching and Monitoring features are the keys to your needs. If you want to provide a lot of static images or data, the Caching feature works best for you.I would say the rewriting and redirection functions are must-have's for us.

Read more »

Cons
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.It is not stable nor mature.

Read more »

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
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 »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
372,374 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
2,794
Comparisons
2,223
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
411
Avg. Rating
8.6
Views
2,072
Comparisons
1,808
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
398
Avg. Rating
9.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 28% of the time.
Compared 9% 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)
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Imperva, Cloudflare and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2019.
372,374 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.
Sign Up with Email