We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and Arbor DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is scalable for DDoS."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"I have contacted the support team of Akamai... I am happy with their responses and answers to my problems."
"The CDN and the WAF features are the best."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"Traffic filtering and WAF are valuable."
"The features are powerful and better than F5."
"The product has a good user interface."
"The most valuable feature is mitigation, which can blackhole the IP."
"Our customers are very happy when we provide them with the interface... They can check how many attacks they have faced and how many attacks have been blocked."
"The technical support of Arbor DDoS is good."
"The quality of the technical support provided by Arbor DDoS is premium."
"It is fully mitigating the attacks. We've dealt with other ones where we didn't necessarily see that. The detection is very good. It's also very simple to use. Arbor is a single pane of glass, whereas with other solutions you might have a detection pane of glass and then have to go to a separate interface to deal with the mitigation. That single pane of glass makes it much simpler."
"The stateless device format means that the box is very strong for preventing DDoS attacks."
"We use it not only for DDoS detection and protection, but we also use it for traffic analysis and capacity planning as well. We've also been able to extend the use of it to other security measures within our company, the front-line defense, not only for DDoS, but for any kind of scanning malware that may be picked up. It's also used for outbound attacks, which has helped us mitigate those and lower our bandwidth costs..."
"Analytics and its attack mitigation capabilities are valuable features of the solution."
"In terms of precedence of Akamai rules, the last one is implemented. That is the one that is operational. If two rules contradict, the last one is implemented. We had a clash, but it was really tough to find that out. I would like to have a rulebook because, in their architecture documentation, it is not mentioned anywhere that if two rules clash, the last one works, and if it does not work, then what to do. This is something we were debating today with their tech support. With AWS, we get documents for the issues so that they do not occur in the future. Akamai's support and knowledge base needs to be improved."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"One area where Akamai can improve is the captcha part. Cloudflare provides a captcha if there are a certain number of threats. For example, I can assign that if there are 10 requests within a second from a single IP, it should send a captcha to the user. The user should fill in the captcha, and only after that, the user should be able to access our website. This captcha feature should be built into Bot Manager. I love this captcha feature of Cloudflare."
"The performance of the cloud monitoring tool is low."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"Akamai App and API Protector is very new to me, so I do not have any insights on improvement areas for the product. However, when we ask for some help, it can take some time. We understand that the job is done by professionals, but if that time can be reduced, it would be great."
"It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"With Arbor DDoS, its integration issues with other technologies or other vendors' technologies is an area of concern that could be improved."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"They should improve the reporting section and make it a little bit more detailed. I would like to have much better and more detailed reports."
"The following areas need improvement: opening and tracking support tickets, online support resources, software upgrades/updates and replacement media, and event management guidelines."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"Arbor DDoS could improve out-of-the-box reporting, it could be better."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 3rd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 27 reviews while Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and Cloudflare, whereas Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Corero and Prolexic. See our Akamai App and API Protector vs. Arbor DDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.