We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Corero 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."Its scalability is big. It is for large deployments of big organizations and service providers."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"Reporting is quite good. There are several pages of reporting on DDoS attacks, and you can find all the details that you need."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We have taken on the Arbor Cloud subscription, which is really useful because you secure yourself for anything beyond your current mitigation capacity. This is a really good feature of Arbor that is available."
"It provides packet capture and we can block or whitelist whichever IPs we need to. Whatever traffic we want to block - and we get IPs from internal teams and from national teams - we block at the Arbor level only, because if it gets to the firewall then firewall bandwidth will be taken."
"The solution provides good protection against volumetric DDoS attacks."
"Arbor has a global ranking in reliability and credibility. They are very unique and can respond to a very wide scope of threats from their global deployment."
"This is a hybrid solution."
"The DDoS protection features are valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Corero is its ability to handle smaller attacks in terms of the amount of volume and time. You can handle almost 100 perfect of the attacks locally."
"It is an agnostic and transparent inline platform, which means that the maximum visibility of the symmetric and asymmetric traffic is available, even allowing bidirectional detection of the attack."
"SmartWall devices occupy only one-fourth of the width of a rack unit, making them very easy to install."
"It is a good solution. Its vendor support is the most valuable. It is simple and works well if you have Juniper MX routers."
"There is always room for improvement for any product or service. If we can bring in more agility when deploying services, that is definitely a scope which we can work towards. Nowadays, everything is being offered as a service model. It is not that we have to deploy the physical hardware, many things move up to the cloud, or even can be delivered in the VNS form in the customer's environment as well. So, in that space, if we can add more features to make it more seamless for customers to use and make it available through some marketplace, not only at the hyperscalers, but also for any on-prem deployment, that definitely would be a big plus."
"The solution needs to enhance its features to compete with other tools."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"If we want to see live traffic, we can see do so. But once an attack that lasts for five minutes is done, the data is no longer there. It would be an improvement if we could see recent traffic in the dashboard. We can check and download live traffic, but a past attack, with all the details, such as why it happened and how to mitigate and prevent such future attacks, would be helpful to see."
"Arbor's SSL decryption is confusing and needs external cards to be installed in the devices. This is not the best solution from an architectural point of view for protecting HTTPS and every other protocol that is SSL encrypted."
"For troubleshooting problems, it's not so intuitive. It's not straightforward. This is the core of their kernel, so they need to improve it a little bit... In F5 I have full control of everything."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"The approach taken by Corero is to partner with other organizations in order to address volumetric attacks that cannot be handled by the hardware installed in the infrastructure. Corero does not have a solution for these attacks, so they are looking for partners to help them manage them. This approach is supplemented by local hardware, but the main focus is on the partnerships. It would be beneficial to have a more complete solution."
"The product must provide more Layer 7 capabilities."
"It could use support in Spanish."
"Juniper is known in our country, but it is not very popular. There is also not enough information about Corero. Our enterprise and financial sectors don't know about this solution. They need to provide more information and do more marketing for this solution in our country."
"Lacks international presence."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Corero is ranked 18th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 5 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Corero is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Corero writes "Effect local attack handling, intuitive interface, and scalable". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Fortinet FortiDDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas Corero is most compared with Cloudflare, Radware DefensePro, Radware Cloud DDoS Protection Service, Lumen DDoS Mitigation and Nexusguard DDoS Protection. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Corero 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.