Share your experience using Spirent CyberFlood

I use CyberFlood to generate SSL traffic for cybersecurity testing.

CyberFlood is flexible. 

Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing.

I have used CyberFlood for two to three years.

I rate CyberFlood six out of 10 for stability.

I rate CyberFlood five out of 10 for scalability. The scalability is limited.

I rate Spirent support seven out of 10. 

Neutral

I didn't find the setup to be too complex. It took some learning, but it wasn't too difficult. 

CyberFlood gives us clear numbers for SSL testing.

CyberFlood was expensive when I purchased it. 

I rate Spirent CyberFlood seven out of 10. I recommend knowing your parameters and how much traffic you plan to test, so you get an idea of what the device is capable of.

CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function.

CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better. In the next release, CyberFlood should include more pre-cover for new protocols and applications.

I've been using Spirent CyberFlood for over three years.

CyberFlood is stable.

CyberFlood's scalability is limited.

Spirent's technical support is good both online and offline.

CyberFlood is reasonably priced.

CyberFlood is bundled and basic, but it's still powerful and easy to use, and I would recommend it, especially for beginners. I would rate CyberFlood nine out of ten.