We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Sucuri 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 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."
"Its scalability is big. It is for large deployments of big organizations and service providers."
"There were huge attacks in October, around 62 attacks at 30 gigabits per second, at one of our banks. We used Arbor DDoS to mitigate these attacks, and it performed great."
"The product allows us to check real-time progress, including latency and network activities."
"The stability is okay and we have not encountered problems with the solution."
"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."
"The auto-mitigation, that signaling feature, where it automatically raises an alarm that a line is under attack, is important. The upstream service provider will then do something to reduce the load on our internet lines. The fact that it's automated means I don't have to sit and always be looking at threats coming through. It does it almost automatically, without any intervention by me."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Domain name scanning since it allows us to scan all our domain names and determine whether it has malware or if is reported as phishing."
"I use it as a WAF, which is basically a web firewall to monitor and block traffic to our web server."
"The initial setup was straightforward. Straight forward because the plugin can simply be installed and then it does its job. It's not complex, there is no learning curve. The online scan is simple, you put in the website address and the scan gives us a report on the browser itself. It's simple to use."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"It significantly eases the workload and streamlines the initial setup required to protect a website."
"The most valuable part is the analytics and visualization."
"The support got worse after NETSCOUT acquired Arbor."
"An improvement to Arbor DDoS would be to make evaluation licenses and virtual machines available."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"When it comes to some false positives, we need to tweak the system from time to time. There is room for improvement when it comes to the actual mitigation because of some false positives."
"The implementation should be made easier."
"Implementation could be better."
"An issue which needs to be addressed concerns information I received of attacks on the radar and Arbor, allegedly, not taking any action."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"Sucuri could provide help for specific security alerts in-line instead of requiring users to search for it in the help section."
"It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance."
"In terms of improvement, the cost factor is always there."
"The main improvement I would like to see is support for .NET applications. If they could include this feature, I would include more sites in the protection."
"I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Sucuri is ranked 18th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 6 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Sucuri 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 Sucuri writes "Simple solution and good WAF". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas Sucuri is most compared with Cloudflare, AWS WAF, SiteLock, Comodo cWatch and StackPath WAF. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Sucuri 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.