We performed a comparison between F5 Advanced WAF and R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."Very easy to implement and works well."
"F5's user-friendly interface and seamless integration stand out as the most valuable features for us."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the easy identification of events and customization. We can pinpoint our settings."
"The product has valuable features for load balancing, monitoring tools, and HPXpress services."
"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."
"In terms of F5 Advanced WAF's most valuable features, I would definitely say its stability. F5 is one the most stable products. Either as the load balancer or the web application firewall, it is very stable."
"One of the most valuable features is the Local Traffic Manager."
"It also has antivirus and DDoS mitigation capabilities. We have enabled these features."
"The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve the precision of the scanning. There are many false positives. They should improve their threat database."
"Its price should be better. It is expensive."
"The solution is tedious. It takes a lot of discrete settings so one needs to get detailed and granular when they use the solution. It takes you a whole lot of energy and concentration to configure. It needs to be much more straight-forward, like other web solutions."
"There is a learning curve that extends the time of implementation."
"Compatibility with multiple cloud environments needs improvement. Both stability and scalability need to be improved."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve resource usage, it is CPU intensive. Additionally, adding automated remediation would be a benefit. For example, an easy button alerts us of the events that are occurring, and what we want to do at the time. An automated approach where somebody could be alerted very quickly. Instead of going and reconfiguring everything, an automated approach is what I'm looking at."
"The reporting could be clearer and embedded to include our movement data."
"It's sometimes difficult to customize APIs with F5 Advanced WAF."
"The area that should be improved is licensing."
F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 54 reviews while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is ranked 31st in Web Application Firewall (WAF). F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6, while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) writes "Geo-localization and IP reputation help to keep our clients secure and more available". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), whereas R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Akamai App and API Protector.
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.
