We performed a comparison between Imperva Web Application Firewall and Radware Cloud WAF Service 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.
"There are many features. There is ease of deployment. You can deploy the Imperva Web Application Firewall in two to three minutes. After that, you have to set the policies. For setting policies, you have toggle buttons. You can turn something on or off."
"The most valuable features of Imperva Web Application Firewall are the monitoring of databases and the dashboards are easy to understand."
"It has threat intelligence and we are using Incapsula. With threat intelligence, we can separate HTTP and HTTPS traffic. We can use Incapsula to send all the threat intelligence to the WAF."
"We can prevent attacks or issues even before they happen."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"Very intuitive and granular configuration - It does not require much time, or advanced knowledge, for configuration and maintenance."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"The isolation feature is the most important one because everything is going directly to Radware first and then it goes into our system. What we get is the filtered version of everything that would otherwise come directly to us."
"Geo-blocking is one of the most valuable features we use the most; most of our users are in North, Central, and South America, so we use geo-blocking to block access from other countries."
"The solution requires very little maintenance; we install it, it works without any problems, is reliable, and we can almost forget about it."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service is user-friendly and easy to deploy."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service has several valuable features, with good support and a user-friendly GUI."
"Cloud WAF's interface is easy to use and protects us from OWASP Top Ten threats. Our dev team do QA checks on applications before they go live, but Cloud WAF creates an additional security layer on our website."
"It provides the first level of defense against external threats trying to come into the environment, but it's one of the many toolkits we use."
"The API Discovery is also very good because the application is outsourced, which means that we don't have the code. API Discovery allowed me to discover precisely how to orchestrate the API so that I could see the results."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"It's a complicated tool to keep."
"It would be helpful to have a "recommended deployment", or even a list of basic features that should either be used or turned on by default."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"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."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is very expensive."
"If we want to publish services to a limited number of providers and we only want those providers to connect, we need to forward those requests to the Radware support team and they apply them, but it takes some time."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service has limited integrations, and I would like to see it integrate with our use of Azure DevOps."
"They have a portal for webinar training but because we are in a Spanish-speaking country, it is difficult for us to watch them. Not all of us are fluent in English, but most of the courses and webinars are in English. That part could be improved..."
"The primary area for improvement is in issue detection and understanding whether a log is a false positive. It can sometimes be a challenge to take the data of a given security event and determine if it's a genuine threat using a Wiki etc."
"Radware does not have much online training available to help customers get the most out of this solution."
"We receive many reports from our security team of IPs flagged by our security tools, such as Palo Alto. I cannot add the file containing the IPs to get them blocked; instead, I have to contact Radware support and open a ticket for them to do it. I need to be able to block flagged IPs myself, as it currently takes more time to open a ticket, contact the support team, and wait four to six hours for a response. I want to be able to upload a file with 2,000-3,000 IPs in the console and then apply and save the configuration."
"Our only complaint is the reporting on the DDoS side. We also use Radware for on-premises DDoS protection and their Vision product. I just want to give paint you an example. We face so many Layer 3 and Layer 4 DDoS attacks on Cloud WAF. The reporting on those types of attacks can be improved."
"The implementation was hit or miss for the first few months. They did some tweaking and, since then, there have been no problems."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews while Radware Cloud WAF Service is ranked 11th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 15 reviews. Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Radware Cloud WAF Service is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Cloud WAF Service writes "Serves as a comprehensive solution for both our current and prospective customers, generating revenue for us". Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door, whereas Radware Cloud WAF Service is most compared with AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Imperva DDoS and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our Imperva Web Application Firewall vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service 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.
