We performed a comparison between Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Imperva Web Application Firewall 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."Someone with a basic understanding of networking and security will be able to implement the firewall's basic features within 15 minutes."
"It is configurable via API."
"The security features are valuable. The particular feature we use is called OWASP."
"The product has a valuable security control functionality."
"The Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's most valuable feature is its ease of configuration."
"The integration of Cloudflare with Cloud Suite is its most valuable feature."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"The solution protects our application, which runs on the HTTP protocol, from DDoS attacks."
"It mitigates all of the availabilities of risks around web applications."
"Learning mode and custom policies are helpful features."
"Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like signatures to identify attacks like cross-site scripting or SQL injection."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"The features I have found most valuable with Imperva Web Application Firewall are account takeover protection, advanced bot protection, and API security."
"It has fewer false positives"
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should improve visibility for a customer."
"There could be an option to duplicate the cluster to maintain the consistency of rules."
"I have experienced some difficulties with Cloudflare's support as a customer based in India."
"They have some limitations with third-party integrations."
"The ModSecurity core rules need to be updated."
"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well. They have documentation for everything you're looking for, but they lack a single piece of documentation to tie everything together. As a new user or beginner, it took us a little bit of time to figure out how to put all these things in place."
"A key challenge arises when dealing with numerous integrations with HVAC systems. Depending on the specifics, there might be some configuration mismatches, which necessitate specific support."
"The accuracy of the Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could be improved by reducing the number of false-negative alerts."
"I am looking for more data enrichment. We should have the ability to add our own custom data to the system, to the live traffic."
"They recently separated the WAF and the DAM management gateways in order for each of these to be managed from different areas, so I believe it now requires additional investments for what was previously a single complete solution."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"The only disadvantage of Imperva is that it is a pretty costly solution."
"The support for the on-premises version needs improvement."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"Some of the features should be included in the next release is a file integrating monitoring tool. This feature should be improved."
"There could be some limitations that from the converged infrastructure perspective: when you want to converge with everything and you want Imperva to get there easily because it's not a cloud component. For example, when you want to build servers and you're using OneView to manage your software-defined networks, implementing Imperva right away is not that simple. But if you're doing just a simple cloud infrastructure with servers in there, you're good to go. Also, we are not able, with Imperva, to block by signatures. Imperva by itself needs to be complemented with another service to do URL filtering."
More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 16 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall writes "A cloud solution for web application firewall protection with rate-limiting, managed, and custom firewall rules". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai App and API Protector, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Radware Alteon, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). See our Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall 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.
