We performed a comparison between Cloudflare and StackPath WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, NETSCOUT, Akamai and others in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection."Cloudflare is a security SaaS provider that provides security and protects us from any application layer attack."
"The solution is very good at mitigating threats."
"Many websites require an SSL certificate because they sell stuff and want SSL. Cloudflare comes with an SSL certificate built in. It's automatic. You sign yourself up for Cloudflare, and an SSL certificate automatically protects your website. You don't necessarily need a certificate if you have a connection between your website and your host, the server, Cloudflare, and the host."
"We're using dynamic components to build flexible pages to create and manage Git merge requests for code and reviews."
"I like Cloudflare's application gateway and DDoS protection."
"The most valuable feature of Cloudflare is the GUI. You are able to control the solution very well through the interface. There is a lot of functionality that is embedded in the service."
"I rate its stability a ten out of ten."
"The solution provides good load balancing and protection against DDoS attacks."
"The product’s most valuable is WAF. The authentication feature helps us protect WordPress sites."
"Support response time could be improved."
"It should be easier to collect the logs with companies like Sumo. However, based on my discussions with the salespeople, I understand that's how they make their money. With the enterprise product, they want people doing those kinds of enterprise features to do the logging. They want them to pay a lot of money, and that's where I have an issue with them. That should be a default. You should be able to get the log no matter what. The logging should be universal."
"We're facing challenges due to an upgrade in the machine learning model. The problem arises from some users abusing the APIs, resulting in an influx of suspicious traffic. Cloudflare's learning model mistakenly identifies this traffic as human. Consequently, it assigns it a higher trust score, akin to legitimate human traffic, causing complications in our architecture. Previously, such traffic would have been categorized as suspicious, enabling us to apply appropriate blocking rules. However, we encounter difficulties distinguishing between genuine and suspicious traffic with the new categorization. Despite these challenges, overall, Cloudflare remains the preferred solution compared to Azure, AWS CloudFront, and Google Cloud Armor."
"The reporting can definitely be improved to offer a lot more explanation on something that may have happened or has actually happened."
"Cloudflare could offer a better view or maybe dashboards of the main resources used in the client."
"The solution could use more analytics on the backend to give us more insights into everything. More reports would be helpful."
"I think the APIs are a little bit hard for us to work with. The APIs could be more open so that we could integrate better with our SolarWinds or our monitoring solution."
"Although I think it's quite good, it doesn't provide me with all the features I would expect to have if I were using Imperva."
"The product’s performance for caching feature needs improvement."
Cloudflare is ranked 1st in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 56 reviews while StackPath WAF is ranked 27th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review. Cloudflare is rated 8.4, while StackPath WAF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cloudflare writes "It's easy to set up because you point the DNS to it, and it's working in under 15 minutes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of StackPath WAF writes "Stable product with an easy setup process ". Cloudflare is most compared with Akamai, Azure Front Door, Imperva DDoS, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and AWS Shield, whereas StackPath WAF is most compared with Sucuri and AWS WAF.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.
