Compare Barracuda Web Application Firewall vs. HAProxy

Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 5th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 6 reviews while HAProxy which is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers with 19 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while HAProxy is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Give us visibility into server connections/sessions, real-time alerts, KPIs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "VRRP redundancy is a mission-critical feature that works seamlessly for us". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, HAProxy and Fortinet FortiWeb, whereas HAProxy is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, NGINX Plus and Citrix NetScaler ADC.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Incapsula, Cloudflare and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: June 2019.
353,854 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
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.This product gives us visibility into what is going on in two servers, including connections and sessions, real-time alerts, very good reporting, and KPIs. It makes managing security of a critical server very easy, with a friendly GUI.There is no one special feature, but the WAF itself is valuable: user-friendly protection against web attacks etc., authentication, reporting, accountability, alerting, and hardened OS.

Read more »

It solves a problem for me where I can build files, not based on the health of the check, but rather the speed of the check.I can simplify configurations of many internal services (e.g. Web server configs) by moving some elements (like SSL) to HAProxy. I can also disable additional applications, like Varnish, by moving traffic shaping configurations to HAProxy.Advanced traffic rules, including stick tables and ACLs, which allow me to shape traffic while it's load balanced.Performance configuration options with threads, processes, and core stickiness are very valuable.The ability to handle a sequence of front- and back-ends gives the user the opportunity to send traffic through different services.We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host.It reduced the load on our main load balancers.We did not need technical support because the documentation is good.

Read more »

Cons
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.This product could easily progress to be among the industry leaders. I think they need to improve enterprise level automation. It integrates with a small number of vulnerability scanners, so report results should be imported manually; same for SIEM integration.

Read more »

The logging functionality could use improvement, as it is a little cryptic.There are three main areas to improve: 1) Make remote management more modern by adding API. 2) Propose a general HA ​solution for HAProxy (no I'm using keepalived for this). 3) Thread option should be a bit more stable.The configuration should be more friendly, perhaps with a Web interface. For example, I work with the ClusterControl product for Severalnines, and we have a Web interface to deploy the HAProxy load-balancer.We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files.The web stats UI, which provides the status of the health and numbers, could greatly benefit from having a RESTful interface to control the load-balanced nodes. Although there is a hack around the UI (by issuing a POST request to HAProxy with parameters), a RESTful interface would greatly improve the automation process (through Chef and Ansible).I would like to evaluate load-balancing algorithms other than round robin and SSL offloading. Also, it would be helpful if I could logically divide the HAProxy load-balancing into multiple entities so that I would install one HA Proxy LB application which could be used for different Web servers for different applications. I am not sure if these features are available.They should introduce one feature that I know many people, including me, are waiting for: HAProxy should have provide hot-swipe for back-end servers. Also, they need a more detailed GUI for monitoring and configuration.​It needs proper HTTP/2 support.​

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
They have competitive pricing.The pricing is less compared to other web applications.

Read more »

The only cost is for the image manager, who is responsible for uploading the image, and that is trivial.I think that the pricing is very fair, I would definitely recommend buying the Enterprise license.We use NGINX as well. However, because the health checks are a paid feature, I like to avoid it whenever possible​.If you don't have expertise then go with the licensed version. Otherwise, open-source is the best solution.Very good value for the money. One of the simplest licensing schemes in this category of products.Test/lab virtual machines can be installed without a licence. They can't be used for performance testing but otherwise behave like production nodes.The price is well worth it. HAProxy Enterprise Edition paid for itself within months, simply due to the resiliency it brings. It was a bit more expensive than we were originally interested in paying, but we are thankful we chose to go with HAProxy.HAProxy is free software. There are optional paid products (support/appliances).

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
353,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
3,910
Comparisons
2,042
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
247
Avg. Rating
8.6
Views
15,873
Comparisons
10,948
Reviews
22
Average Words per Review
327
Avg. Rating
9.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 42% of the time.
Compared 29% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
HAProxy Community Edition, HAProxy Enterprise Edition, HAPEE
Learn
Barracuda Networks
HAProxy
Video Not Available
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.

HAProxy is the most widely used software load balancer and application delivery controller in the world. The core HAProxy application delivery engine is an open source project chiefly maintained by HAProxy Technologies and assisted by a thriving open source community. HAProxy Community Edition is available for free at haproxy.org. HAProxy Enterprise Edition is packaged with additional enterprise class features, services and premium support from HAProxy Technologies.

Offer
Learn more about Barracuda Web Application Firewall
Learn more about HAProxy
Sample Customers
Oracle, CBS, Pioneer, Hyundai, Publix, Barnes Noble, Calzedonia, Nordstrom, Samsung, NascarBooking.com, GitHub, Reddit, StackOverflow, Tumblr, Vimeo, Yelp
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm33%
Retailer22%
Marketing Services Firm22%
Non Profit11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Healthcare Company43%
Marketing Services Firm17%
Media Company12%
Non Profit8%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business20%
Midsize Enterprise55%
Large Enterprise25%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise59%
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Incapsula, Cloudflare and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: June 2019.
353,854 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