We performed a comparison between Imperva Web Application Firewall and Rapid7 AppSpider 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)."If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency."
"The WAF itself has been very valuable to me because it has such a complete range of features. Another reason why I like it is because it also takes care of the total overview of the traffic over the network."
"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."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable."
"Learning mode and custom policies are helpful features."
"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."
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"The compliance is the most valuable aspect."
"It scans all the components developed within a web application."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"The most valuable feature of Rapid7 AppSpider is the vulnerability reporting data. Additionally, the data is reported in a convenient way rather than seeing them as a PDF. We are able to generate all the reports exactly what we want in a flexible way."
"When it is set up properly, it can do scanning on web apps with multiple engines automatically."
"They can provide an option to create reports, automatically import the entire report, and create rules again. In a real-life crisis, it would be helpful to be able to import a report and generate security rules from that report. I should be able to create a simple query and import the reports automatically. It can maybe also tell us the format of the report."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"The support for the on-premises version needs improvement."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size. Learning capability of the device is quite weak."
"I loved the approach of the cloud. The cloud has a lot of new features, like advanced web protection and DDoS protection. If those could also be on-boarded onto the on-prem versions, that would be ideal. They need to pay attention to both deployment options and not just favor one."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"Implementing Rapid7 AppSpider requires scanning and self-identification mechanisms. You can add different types of authentication to each scan."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"Integration could be better."
"The dashboard and interface are crucial and they need some improvement."
"It needs better integration with mobile applications."
"The performance of the solution could improve. When I compare the speed it is slower than others on the market. There are some tricks we use to help speed up the solution."
"The enterprise interface is too simple. It should be more customizable."
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 Rapid7 AppSpider is ranked 25th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 13 reviews. Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Rapid7 AppSpider is rated 7.8. 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 Rapid7 AppSpider writes "Useful vulnerability reporting data, flexible, and simple implementation". Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door, whereas Rapid7 AppSpider is most compared with Rapid7 InsightAppSec, OWASP Zap, Acunetix, Invicti and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning.
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.