F5 Advanced WAF vs R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
R&S Web Application Firewal...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
33rd
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 15.0%, up from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

Richard Polyak - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 24, 2022
Protects our environment and is easy to use and scalable for our needs
It protects our public entities. Its use case is very directed at a resolution of security It protects our environment. It protects our entities. Identification, ease of use, and ease of modifying it to most of our needs are valuable. There should be more ability to rate limit certain…
SS
Mar 3, 2020
Geo-localization and IP reputation help to keep our clients secure and more available
One of our customers needed to publish a web application. Since the customer had a platform that included a Hyper-V cluster, we chose the virtual version of the appliance. We have deployed the WAF (web application Firewall) in reverse proxy mode to protect the published web application with the…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"F5 Advanced WAF is a stable solution, we are satisfied. It is more stable than ForiWeb."
"The best solution for WAF."
"It's flexible and powerful, and the users can input their own rules to the system."
"The most valuable features of the F5 Advanced WAF are the enhanced ASM and the performance. Additionally, the usability and effectiveness are very good."
"I like them because I like the security solution. They get extra marks compared to other solutions or competitors. There are more features than any other product I can think of. They're always monitoring, and the security features offer more than other, lesser products."
"This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most."
"Provides good protection from attacks."
"Customers find the load balancer feature as the most valuable."
"The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis."
 

Cons

"Compatibility with multiple cloud environments needs improvement. Both stability and scalability need to be improved."
"Its price should be better. It is expensive."
"Scalability could be improved."
"The delay times on firmware patches and software updates could be better and improved."
"The reporting could be clearer and embedded to include our movement data."
"Nevertheless, F5 products are generally considered to be hard to deploy."
"It's sometimes difficult to customize APIs with F5 Advanced WAF."
"The reporting portion of F5 Advance WAF is not great. They need to work out something better, as it is very basic. You only see the top IPs, I think there is more they can offer."
"The area that should be improved is licensing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's more expensive than other solutions and depending on the modules, there can be additional fees."
"There are different licenses available to use F5 Advanced WAF, such as BT, ASM, and LPM."
"The price of the solution is reasonable when compared with other products, such as FortiWeb. I am very satisfied with the price."
"Pricing for this solution is higher than average."
"There is an annual subscription for this solution."
"It is expensive. Its price should be better. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. Its licensing is also based on the model. There are no additional costs."
"The solution is very expensive so should only be used in the right environment."
"The price of F5 Advanced WAF could improve it is expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about F5 Advanced WAF?
It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Advanced WAF?
The product is not so expensive. It depends on the assets.
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
The self-service aspect could be improved. The user interface (UI) also seems a bit outdated. Making it more user-friendly would be beneficial.
Which Web Application Firewall (WAF) would you recommend? R&S or Imperva?
Imperva is a strong choice, given their security focus and ongoing R&D into the product in areas such as bot management.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Rohde & Schwarz Web Application Firewall, R&S WAF, DenyAll Web Application Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: May 2024.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.