Cloudflare Reviews

I use it for my private work network and Office 365 network for both DNS and access through Cloudflare.

Its ease of integration with Office 365 and the fact that it's a good product compared to what I had before.

An integrated SSO would be nice, as well as the ability to integrate with the on-site active directory instead of just AD through Azure AD.

I have been using Cloudflare DNS for two years. 

Their documentation is awesome, so I haven't had to deal with their tech support before. I would rate my experience with customer service as excellent, maybe an eight or nine out of ten.

Positive

I would say try it out, and if you like it, use it. I would rate it very good, a ten out of ten. 

We use it for DNS load balancing and WAF. 

The solution offers the flexibility to control configuration rules. 

The product needs to improve its automation. 

I have been using the product for two and a half years. 

I would rate the product's stability a ten out of ten since it never went down for me. 

I would rate the solution's scalability a ten out of ten since I didn't encounter any issues with it. 

The tool's setup straightforward. 

We have had ROI with the tool's use since it never gave us downtime and made us lose millions. 

I will rate the product an eight out of ten. Cloudflare is better than Cloud DNS. You need to start using Terraform along with Cloudflare. It will make your life easier without the need for manual creation. People usually thing they are going to use Cloudflare less but will end up using it more. 

We are using Cloudflare for the CDN for our applications. We deployed the solution as SaaS.

Cloudflare has many features. We can control profits, block attacks, and use a Global Location CDN. Additionally, we have a single console from which we can manage multiple tasks.

In the last two years, there has been a certain amount of downtime when using the VDM. Compared to other vendors and Cloudflare, there will be more downtime. We encountered this issue last year, and there have been a few occasions when Cloudflare was not accessible in certain regions, not all global regions or speed regions, but the website went down and it took Cloudflare a long time to restore the service.

I have been using the solution for two years.

We have experienced a few periods of downtime in the last two years, but the solution is generally stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup is not difficult. All the steps for deployment are documented. We followed the step-by-step instructions for configuration.

The implementation was completed in-house by three employees.

I give the price a five out of ten.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

Maintenance is easy; we receive a notification whenever maintenance is needed, as well as if a major restoration is required and what the likelihood of the system going offline will be.

I recommend Cloudflare.

We use Cloudflare DNS for websites when our clients want to have good protection. We can filter any traffic before sending it to their web page.

The most valuable feature of Cloudflare DNS is security.

The documentation could improve for Cloudflare DNS.

I have been using Cloudflare DNS for approximately eight years.

Cloudflare DNS is stable. I have not had an issue.

The solution is scalable. It can scale approximately 10 percent, it is limited only by how much money you want to spend on the increase.

I used this solution for large-sized companies because it is expensive.

I have used the support and they could improve.

I rate the support from Cloudflare DNS a six out of seven.

Neutral

The setup of Cloudflare DNS is easy. It is important to search for recommendations for best practices.

I rate the initial setup of Cloudflare DNS an eight out of ten.

The price of the solution is expensive.

I rate the price of Cloudflare DNS five out of ten.

I always advise my client to protect their websites and do DNS filtering.

I rate Cloudflare DNS an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case would be as an immediate wrapper-type security solution as opposed to other solutions which put an in-point monitor on a workstation. I'm the VP of our company and director of IT.

They've implemented a tunneling system. It's not quite VPN, but it's not quite HTTP traffic, either. It's a very robust and different system which, in my opinion, is what needs to be done. New and innovative ways to protect the client's data should be the focus.

I think they have failed with their technical support. I feel I would have gotten to a solution faster, quicker, and more efficiently if they would have been there to just answer a couple of questions. I had to read so much documentation to validate what I was about to do versus what I had already known I could do. They almost lost me as a customer and it was only because I had a bit of time and the gumption, the drive to keep going. I'm glad I did, but I'm not happy with the road. It was bumpy.

I've been using this solution for about three months. 

Stability is great. I love their mechanisms, I love their GUI, I love their front end, I love their behind the scenes. Algorithms and everything, it all makes sense. I look at Microsoft and I say, you just don't make sense anymore. If you've been working in this industry for long enough, you know what makes sense and what doesn't make sense. And this box ware makes a lot of sense.

The solution is open ended like with Cisco so quite scalable. I'm the only one using it and, at this point, I'm probably using 2% of their overall capacity. We're in the process of reevaluating our presence on the cloud, our data on the cloud and our ability to do work in the cloud. 

I've tried to contact technical support three times without any luck. I found the solution myself. If I look at the community, I see others have experienced the same issue. 

I carried out a comparison of Cloudflare with Call Ways, which was a good runner-up. Not only because of the sophistication of their cloud monitoring system, but they also have zero remediation, which means that they will tell you that you've got a problem even though they can't fix it. I'm also looking at Support Net as a primary firewall to replace the firewalls that I'm going to retire. I accidentally found Cloudflare, which offered me a lot more than any of the other companies, because the first thing it did was to encrypt all my traffic. Microsoft had failed us and as a result I had to shut everything down for three days and reconfigure firewalls and everything before bringing it all back up again.

On this particular system, I didn't have as much budget as I would have liked, but I still had the redundancy that I wanted. The complexity was that things don't work the way they used to so I had to rethink things. In the end, deployment for the actual solution took about 10 minutes. It was a matter of just literally giving them a credit card and flipping a switch. It's been fine ever since. 

All my data was encrypted before the hackers got past two firewalls. Encrypting your data does not keep hackers from getting in. In that respect, Cloudflare has proved to be a huge benefit for us. 

For now, the cost of Cloudflare is very reasonable compared to everything else. It's hard to say what will be down the track. Sometimes these companies offer very good deals early on and then annual fees increase as the companies become more successful. 

There is a lot of documentation and I would recommend reading it. I think that's how they want their tech support to work, through community. The community doesn't talk so well with each other like the Microsoft community because Microsoft's been around a lot longer. It isn't quite working perfectly yet and they don't have experts to answer the questions. They want the users to come to the realization for themselves, based on what I see in the conversations in the communities. It's a millennial mentality. We don't have to be involved, we'll just make the product and let them solve their own problems. That's an issue for me.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

Cloudflare is easy to use. It's very intuitive. Although I think it's quite good, it doesn't provide me with all the features I would expect to have if I were using Imperva. I think Imperva is far richer in features from what I can see, but I think that can bring its own pains to be honest. For this reason, I think Cloudflare is a simpler version. 

With Imperva, you can drill down to packet-level very easily. It's very, very good at drilling down deeper and deeper into the packet. I think that is available with Cloudflare, but it's not as good. It doesn't seem to provide us with the same kind of search capability as Imperva. Having said that, I think that's one of the advantages of Cloudflare because you just have to click a button and drill down via clicking. I actually like Cloudflare to be honest. Imperva is almost too difficult for normal businesses — it's too complex. There's almost too much information there. Whereas with Cloudflare, it's easier to drill down and it's more intuitive.

I've only been using Cloudflare for a week.

I wasn't involved in the implementation, so I have no idea how much it costs. 

I think this solution is quite intuitive. For businesses that don't have a dedicated security team, I think it's a better product; it's more intuitive for people like us. I'm a network security engineer, but I'm not a dedicated security official. I've too many other things going on to have the time to do the rule sets that you need if you're working with Imperva — I think a lot of that is down to you as the customer. With Cloudflare, I think a lot of that happens in the background. 

I've been working with it for a week and a half so I'm not the best person to say if it's better or worse than Imperva. My only reaction is that maybe it's not as feature-rich for the end-user. Whether that's an advantage, well, that's questionable. Maybe we don't need all of those features sometimes — it depends on the business. The business I'm working in now is a very different business with a different kind of security model. The business I was working with when I used Imperva probably needed that feature-rich capability.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Cloudflare a rating of eight. It's quite intuitive. I like it. From what I've seen so far, there are no negatives to report as of yet.

We are an IT consulting company, we provide solutions to our customers. We implement the solutions for our customers. Some of our customers use CloudFlare, some of them are using  Imperva and Palo Alto.

Our customers use this solution for any web traffic, mostly GCP or to AWS cloud as a backend.

I like caching and DDoS. There are key things that are used for our enterprise customers, such as Lambda and DNS.

Latencies are always a problem.

Also, one thing I would say is you have to maintain DNS through their services. I don't know if that's a requirement or not.

Latencies are the key issue. If you are not caching and just using DDoS then definitely, there are some latencies added to the traffic.

I have been working with Cloudflare for more than six years.

We work with many different versions. For new customers, we use the latest version.

I haven't had any issues with stability. We haven't heard anything from our clients.

It's a stable solution.

It is easy to scale. We haven't had any problems with scalability.

We have not used technical support.

Cloudflare is very straightforward. It is easy to set up.

There is no installation, you just go through the configuration process.

The price is reasonable.

It all depends on what the customer is looking for. These are two different areas. Basically, CloudFare is completely Cloud-based, whereas Imperva I can have a physical appliance or a virtual appliance, or a cloud-based. 

My solution is based on what customers are looking for, but Cloudflare is pretty good and getting really popular in terms of DDoS, the paid version of it.

We looked at the service. What are acceptable latencies? Is it okay to route through a different vendor, and before it reaches the backup? They have to go through multiple vendors. You also have to consider what the latencies cost and is that acceptable for the service. These are key things you need to consider when selecting a cloud-based vendor for DDoS.

I would rate Cloudflare a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for security purposes. We use the product for theft and DDoS protection.

The security on offer is good. Specifically, the DDoS protection is the most valuable aspect of the solution.

The solution can scale if you need it to. It has the capability to expand.

The product seems to be pretty stable overall.

The technical support is very good. They are knowledgeable and they respond quickly.

It would be ideal if the product had some sort of live tracking functionality available to us.

The solution could work at being less expensive. It costs a lot to use it.

I've been using the solution for about two or so years at this point. It's been a while.

I've never really evaluated the stability of the solution. I have no opinion of it. I can't speak to its overall performance very well. Generally, however, I would say that it is largely stable.

The solution doesn't really depend on the number of users, so much as the general traffic. In that sense, it can scale. It's a pretty scalable product.

The technical support on offer is excellent. They are very helpful and responsive. We're quite happy with the level of service they provide to their customers.

The initial setup was neither simple nor complex. It was somewhere in the middle, However, we did have help with the implementation, which was very useful for us.

The deployment took about 11 days in total. It wasn't too long.

Once it is deployed, there is no maintenance required of us. 

The vendor helped us with the initial implementation. We had a good experience with them overall.

The solution is relatively expensive. It's not something that comes at a cheap price.

We are just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

We are using the latest version of the solution currently. I can't speak to the exact version number, however.

I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten overall. We've been quite happy with its capabilities.