We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Reblaze 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."It's simple, easy to use."
"The most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"The agility is great for us in terms of cloud services in general."
"The simple configuration and the scalability have been most valuable. We are able to scale across all of our different AWS instances."
"The most valuable feature is the security, making sure that files are protected, preventing unauthorized users from accessing the system."
"Its best feature is that it is on the cloud and does not require local hardware resources."
"AWS WAF is a stable solution. The performance of the solution is very good."
"This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information."
"We like the website protection. It's really good. The dashboard is really simple to use."
"Provides mobile app security."
"It is a highly resilient product that can handle significantly larger workloads and high volumes of traffic with ease."
"The main feature is using the rules and being able to see the traffic. It helps us find malicious traffic."
"Reblaze knows how to manage security. For me as, someone who knows little about security, it's good that I have a firm that optimizes everything according to their standards. It's their responsibility and they are fully hands-on."
"The real-time monitoring and reporting are very good. There are information updates in their portal every two minutes. They also have the ability to spill it into Sumo Logic, for example. It's very easy to use."
"I very much like the elastic search and reports, allowing us to have a 360-degree view of the customer's activities and enabling us to track down any suspicious bots."
"The most valuable features were the real-time monitoring and the management. With this kind of product, you need a very good management system to allow you to see false positives in real-time; to see what's happening in real-time... The clarity stood out. It was very visible and very easy to navigate; very easy to find the data we were looking for."
"This solution could be improved if the configuration steps were more specific to WAF, compared to other cloud services."
"We haven't faced any problems with the solution."
"One area that could be improved is the DDoS protection."
"We need more support as we go global."
"We should be able to do proper whitelisting."
"The cost management has room for improvement."
"We must monitor and clean up the WAF manually."
"When users choose the free service, there isn't great support available to them."
"Up to now the only cons I could find is sometimes getting change management back on track, because it's a company that evolves, and sometimes I don't have the same needs that they have. But besides that, up until now, I am really pleased with their service and I've also recommended them to some of my clients."
"We have multiple products behind different instances of Reblaze. We have one instance for staging and then we have a production instance for multiple products. One of the things that we have requested is a unified view panel, so that we can see each of the instances in a unified view. That way, we won't have to go bouncing from instance to instance."
"They have an interface that you have to adjust to. That is a bit of a downfall because I expect an interface to be very intuitive for someone who knows little about security. But if you know about security, the interface is wonderful."
"The WAF features are not as granular as we would expect from a WAF system. There should be more granularity and in-depth rules, out-of-the-box."
"Some of the settings on the dashboard are confusing."
"It would be beneficial if it had a workflow or a feature that could fine-tune settings based on high-level requirements."
"I would like to have seen more automated reports. Maybe it has been improved in the last year and I'm just not aware of it. But from a managerial point of view, you want a summary report, a weekly report: How many attacks were blocked? How much bandwidth was saved due to the caching mechanism? What were the top-ten attacks that were tested on the network, etc? I could most likely have found all that data if I logged in to the system and ran different reports. It would be very helpful to get a management report on a weekly basis."
"There is room for improvement in helping us understanding session management... We want Reblaze to catch and identify everything. We want to see the various devices doing one activity and to see, in a timeline, what's happened. We would like to see a more human-readable display to understand what's happening in the web app."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Reblaze is ranked 23rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Reblaze is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Reblaze writes "Offers flexibility with a kill switch for bypassing Reblaze if needed and provides a reliable Layer 7 defense against attacks". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Reblaze is most compared with Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, F5 Advanced WAF, Radware Alteon and Akamai Bot Manager. See our AWS WAF vs. Reblaze 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.