F5 Advanced WAF Room for Improvement

reviewer1046964
IT Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
This solution is the best out there on the market. One thing that can be improved, is to increase the quantity over predefine policy. I know it's impossible to do it all, but what I would have liked to increase the ready-to-deploy templates with only a few clicks. View full review »
Securspec678
Security Specialist at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
The administrator's user interface and some of the settings can sometimes be very complicated to understand. It would really help if they could be easier and more user-friendly. Perhaps the developers can add a training video that shows users what to do. I am sure it is a good product and you only need some experience to become familiar with it. Another thing that may need improvement, is upgrading from one version to another. It is good, but it can be faster. View full review »
SrEngineer089
Senior Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
For F5 Advanced WAF, it's only 70% different over time with upgrades. F5 can still build AWS support after many long years of absence. It's difficult to use. F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards. The pricing is too high. It needs better security features with the interface or dashboard. We go through some problems with the Disc Doctor services and F5 was recommended to fix or avoid the same situation in the future. F5 now is the product we use for the web products to have a web application firewall. We need better integration in the application and more security features in the future. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Microsoft, Citrix and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: September 2019.
366,756 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Reza Torabi
Senior Network Engineer at PECCO
Everything is good about the F5 WAF, except the reporting. It's really difficult to set records from that device, the UI is kind of hard to work with, and the reporting must be improved. As a suggestion to the F5 company, they have to put in shells to have the next generation WAF. So, instead of buying different modules and different hardware and appliances, they can offer an all-in-one solution for WAF. View full review »
Shiran Cohen
Cyber & Security Application Delivery Expert at Hewlett Packard Enterprise
I think the deployment template can be better, like the iApps they have in the F5 MPM. I think the deployment templates can be better. View full review »
GeorgesSamaha
Security Consultant at BMB
In general, the web interface is not really catchy. It's very powerful, very customizable, but it doesn't have a very nice GUI interface for a new adopter. For them, they'd have to do a lot of configuring. At least the reporting and monitoring parts, let's say, to be honest, should have a better interface. A few other products have very nice dashboards, out of the box, and F5 is not that friendly to use. Also, when you buy WAF, you have to buy another module called APM to do authentication. You have to buy another module with an extra license, to have the authentication feature. Other vendors have it interwoven. For example, I don't know if Barracuda has it, but Citrix has it under the same license. So maybe add authentication functionality in the AOS license, and not separate. View full review »
Hillary Ugwuanyi
Head IT Infrasrtucture at ActivEdge
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 straightforward, like other web solutions. They need to have a way to define attack signatures. It might help improve the user experience. View full review »
User54664
User at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
I would not expect traffic details to pass through the web application firewall across the length of the whole application. I think that there is a web application where it can let the application function without traffic going in into the WAF. I think the solution is already being phased out. They are now going for a more advanced option but I'm referring to the web crawler. The web crawler should be able to allow a web application on its own to create policies, rather than wait for traffic to go to the WAF. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Microsoft, Citrix and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: September 2019.
366,756 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sign Up with Email