We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and Comodo cWatch based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."The most valuable feature is the custom rules feature. This is because many of our customers require a lot of custom rules. Because it's a very customized project for our customers, I think they have the best of everything already."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"Everything will be handled by Akamai's system before it reaches our infrastructure."
"The CDN and the WAF features are the best."
"I have contacted the support team of Akamai... I am happy with their responses and answers to my problems."
"The solution can scale extremely well."
"Adaptive stream delivery and WAF protection are valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"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."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"There are some issues with pushing configurations across a network. It still takes about 20 minutes and that means to retract it's another 20 minutes."
"They are already very flexible, but room for improvement is there. Reports generation could be better and should be improved."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"The custom rules must be improved."
"It would be nice if Akamai Web Application Protector's price is lowered and made cheaper."
"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."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
Earn 20 points
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Comodo cWatch is ranked 35th in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Comodo cWatch is rated 9.6. 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 Comodo cWatch writes "Excellent security, good encryption, and pretty stable". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and AWS Shield, whereas Comodo cWatch is most compared with Cloudflare, Atomic ModSecurity Rules, Sucuri and AWS WAF.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.