Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Imperva SecureSphere Web Application Firewall.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The user interface could be better.
It would be useful if the solution used more intelligence in attack protection. For example, firewalls are to be dependent on the configuration, but if they could have some data science around it the solution would be even better. The profiling of the traffic, and making decisions surrounding that should be intelligence-based, instead of being based on the configuration of the firewall itself.
When you want to move to a higher version of the platform, it is not in the GUI and not very easy to do. I expect that this will be available in the next version. I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution. Bot protection is one of the features in Imperva that lets you recognize if their request is coming from a human or coming from a bot. In this context, a bot is a mechanism being used by the attacker. Good bot protection will reduce a lot of the attacks coming into the applications.
Most of the clients are new to this solution and don't have an in-depth knowledge of the solution. It's not so well-known in Ethiopia. Imperva has only been around for a year. Licensing should be improved. Most of the clients aren't happy. It's expensive. Some of the features should be included in the next release is a file integrating monitoring tool. This feature should be improved. Also, it should have a privileged account option. In the solution, if you put it there, that would be a very nice feature so that the clients could get all those solutions in one box. It will be easier for support and for clients.
The firewall aspect of the solution needs improvement. The GUI is not as intuitive enough. It should be more user-friendly, especially for end-users. The initial setup could be simplified. Every time you have to install the solution you have to get in touch with support or somebody that can to do that for you.
The visibility provided by this solution can be improved. I often tell my customers that "You can't fight what you can't see". I can recall a time when I did a presentation after a deployment, and it prompted them to put the solution into enforcement mode immediately. Normally, we wait one week with the solution in monitoring mode. However, once they saw the types of vulnerabilities they had, they wanted to take action right away. It gave them a great deal of knowledge, and knowing that they are protected from these types of attacks has boosted their confidence. This solution has a lot of features, and some of the students were confused when I was discussing them. 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. If somebody has installed the product several times but is doing the same thing incorrectly, then they get experienced in doing the wrong thing. You should be able to specify which assets you need to be protected, and the solution will tell you the minimum in terms of features that need to be turned on. If you need more advanced protection then the others will become relevant. Imperva partner training is something that I would be interested in if it ever came my way. There should be partner-specific webinars, meetings, and other training provided to us,
I would like to see more support available for this product online. Some customers find this to be a real limitation. The virtual processing could be improved. Their portal is very limited and needs improvement.
I just need it to be a stable and normal version. I'd want to hear about the new features to see which I would need.
There could be some limitations rom 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. That's why you need Incapsula.
I am a Sales Director at a company with less than 1,000 employees.
I am researching Web Application Firewalls (WAF). I am considering R&S (DenyAll) and Imperva. Which would you recommend?
Are there others I should consider?
We required a 24/7 automated vulnerability monitoring tool for securing our web applications. We are looking for options like Sitelock and Immuniweb.