We performed a comparison between Barracuda Web Application Firewall and F5 Advanced WAF 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."The most valuable feature is the rule set."
"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."
"Some of the most valuable features are the ease of deployment, the Barracuda support, the easy-to-use console, and the granularity of the reports."
"We only need one subscription to be protected against both active DDoS and offline DDoS attacks."
"The solution has been quite stable. It's reliable."
"You don't need help from Barracuda to help with the deployment. The deployment is easy."
"We use Barracuda to protect the application. That's the main feature we use it for."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the simplicity of configuration."
"It's scalable and very easy to manage."
"This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most."
"The most valuable feature is that it is secure."
"We can monitor IP locations, but we have constraints from each country. It has a replication feature. Licenses can be shared, taking turns with each license."
"F5's user-friendly interface and seamless integration stand out as the most valuable features for us."
"The solution uses AI to protect against botnet attacks."
"Good technology for mitigating different application attacks, e.g. DDoS, DNS, and layer seven attacks."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the balancer and you can change policies very easily."
"I have issues with the load balancing of the solution which is slow. The connection pooling in Barracuda also doesn't work. There is an issue when someone needs access to a site quickly. The issue is with HTTPS services. I am not sure if they have changed all these in the solution’s latest version."
"We get false positives about phishing emails."
"In the Barracuda Web Application Firewall, there should be more affordable options for WAF as a service."
"There are some vulnerabilities that are reported across the tools offered by Barracuda for some devices, which need to be taken care of from an improvement perspective."
"They should improve their features, so they easily compare to the competition."
"Barracuda Web Application Firewall’s scalability needs improvement."
"I would suggest that someone implementing this product is knowledgeable in the IT field, and with the network needs. It is complex."
"The incident reporting needs to be improved."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve the reporting. It's a bit difficult to populate, them. If you're not so familiar with the functions, such as where to find the logs and other settings."
"I would not expect traffic details to pass through the web application firewall across the length of the whole application. I think that there is a web application where it can let the application function without traffic going in into the WAF."
"The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."
"Compatibility with multiple cloud environments needs improvement. Both stability and scalability need to be improved."
"While F5 Advanced WAF does limit the number of partners in certain regions to ensure successful business transactions, they could also benefit from expanding their partnerships and making it easier for more people to learn about and become experts in F5 Advanced WAF. By doing so, they could increase the reach and exposure of their solution, similar to how Cisco has become widely recognized in the security industry."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve the precision of the scanning. There are many false positives. They should improve their threat database."
"Nevertheless, F5 products are generally considered to be hard to deploy."
"The reporting could be clearer and embedded to include our movement data."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 14th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 53 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster and Radware Alteon, whereas F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and NGINX App Protect. See our Barracuda Web Application Firewall vs. F5 Advanced WAF 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.