Share your experience using CacheFly

My main use case for Link11 is DDoS and WAF protection.

For DDoS and load protection, I use Link11 by limiting different parts of our application, which means it is a low-code application.

We specifically limit parts of our web resources in this low-code tool, and therefore we were forced to limit parts of the web path.

The best feature Link11 offers is that the onboarding was quite easy.

The onboarding process with Link11 was easy because of the documentation, support, and possibly other factors.

Regarding the features, I value the classic web interface.

Link11 has impacted my organization positively because, in the end, it is totally necessary for us to have DDoS protection on different parts of our application, especially in production stages.

We can definitely see that we are dealing with a lot of attacks, and the Link11 dashboard shows how many attacks we are evading daily.

I think Link11 can be improved in comparison to Cloudflare, which is a direct competitor.

In comparison to Cloudflare, which is a direct, comparable product, the Cloudflare Tunnel technology is missing.

We started to use Link11 this year, specifically in 2026.

I can confirm that Link11 is stable.

It is quite hard to measure Link11's scalability for us.

The customer support for Link11 is very competent and very helpful.

I would rate the customer support a 10 on a scale of one to ten.

We did not use any DDoS protection before this.

Seeing a return on investment is not possible due to the threats we are dealing with; it is really hard to manage or to measure these threats.

My experience with Link11's pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is quite pricey; it is definitely not a cheap product.

We evaluated Cloudflare before choosing Link11.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give Link11 a seven.

I chose seven as my rating because, first of all, each product can be optimized, and as I mentioned, the tunnel feature is missing.

Regarding Link11's AI capabilities, I totally trust this product.

At this moment, we are using different cloud providers, specifically different German cloud providers, including a mixture of IONOS, Stackit, and Telekom.

My advice for others looking into using Link11 is that it totally depends on your threat analysis, and each customer or user should consult Link11 support to understand the specific problems they are dealing with.

My main use case for Imperva Application Security Platform involves using WAF policies and rules for mitigating WAF attacks, OWASP Top 10, and bot rules.

A specific example of how I use those policies and rules to mitigate web threats is related to a recent attack involving Node.js and PHP vulnerabilities. During a recent PHP attack, Imperva provided us with rules that allowed us to temporarily block the attack on our application security WAF.

The best features that Imperva Application Security Platform offers in my experience include user-friendliness during onboarding. The onboarding process was user-friendly because of the interfaces and documentation provided.

Imperva Application Security Platform has positively impacted my organization as I have noticed that 95% of attacks have been mitigated. I measured that 95% mitigation rate through the Imperva dashboard.

Imperva Application Security Platform could be improved by adding an exclusive web analytics dashboard where I can extensively add multiple parameters and view graphs and tables for events and security events.

Regarding Imperva Application Security Platform's AI capabilities, I think its governance and security need improvement. The accuracy and reliability of output are good as it is accurate, but it still needs fine-tuning because sometimes it also gives false positives.

I have been using Imperva Application Security Platform for seven years.

Imperva Application Security Platform is stable in my experience.

The scalability of Imperva Application Security Platform is an eight.

The customer support for Imperva Application Security Platform is good as I can get a reply instantly in some cases. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the customer support a seven.

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Imperva Application Security Platform is that it is budget-friendly.

Before choosing Imperva Application Security Platform, I evaluated other options such as Incent.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Imperva Application Security Platform an eight. I chose eight out of ten because its interface and documentation are very good, and it is useful for mitigating 95% of attacks in my organization, but it still needs improvement with a web security analytics dashboard compared to Akamai.

Imperva Application Security Platform is deployed in my organization using a public cloud with Incapsula as my cloud provider for deployment. My advice to others looking into using Imperva Application Security Platform is that if someone is looking for a user-friendly WAF solution, they should consider Imperva.