AWS WAF vs Imperva Web Application Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 5, 2022
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Imperva Web Application Fir...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 16.2%, down from 17.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Imperva Web Application Firewall is 6.7%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

Prasanth MG - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 30, 2023
Allows us to set up security rules and has a good scalability
We use the solution as a firewall to protect the network from malicious requests The solution helps our organization to comply with our security standards. The solution allows us to set up rules for blocking malicious requests. We can configure a pool of such sources and choose what to do…
HV
Feb 28, 2024
Stops bot attacks completely and has easy deployment
We were facing issues related to web servers and OWASP Top 10. We had bots rather than human traffic. We went with Imperva for a single-stack solution. We have bot protection, DDoS protection, web application firewall, and database security from Imperva. It is one of the best solutions that I have worked with. After deploying it, bot attacks have completely stopped. When it comes to OWASP Top 10, it responds very clearly when we do testing, so we are not facing any threats. Compliance is also very good. So, overall, it is very good for security and compliance. Imperva is known in the market for customization and deployments according to the use cases of the customers. You can deploy it the way you want. You can deploy it in the inline mode, reverse proxy mode, or transfer and bridge mode. You can deploy it according to the environment or infra of the company. In terms of integration, with one click of a button, you can integrate it with your SIEM solution. You have preconfigured SIEM codes. You just need to run that code in the SIEM application, and that is it. You will start getting the logs. It is pretty easy. For certain web servers, I have it on-prem, and for certain web servers, I have it on the cloud. A basic use case of the customers is that they want a single dashboard for the cloud WAF or on-prem WAF. There is a solution called attack analytics in Imperva. It integrates with on-prem and the cloud, so in a single dashboard, you can see what is happening in your on-prem as well as cloud setup. It is very easy. When it comes to reporting, you can take reports anywhere anytime and you can take logs anywhere anytime. Someone who does not know about cybersecurity can understand the logs. Logs are in English instead of the raw format. Anybody who knows English can understand them. Reporting is very easy. These reports can also be used for audit and compliance. We use SIEM solutions. We use Splunk, and we use Elastic. We use Datadog and Securonix. I integrated Imperva with Elastic and Splunk. We have a pre-written code. We just have to download that code and run the code in the SIEM solution server. After that, the logs start showing. It is that easy. Integration is that easy. I have also done integration with multifactor authentication, security key, HSM, etc. I have worked with RSA and YubiKey. Both of them were very easy. The integration happened with the click of a button. The integration is seamless and is working perfectly. Our clients are happy. We are happy.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Rule groups are valuable."
"AWS WAF is a stable solution. The performance of the solution is very good."
"The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment took about ten minutes or less."
"The access instruction feature is the most valuable. This is what we use the most."
"The agility is great for us in terms of cloud services in general."
"The most valuable feature is that it is very easy to configure. It just takes a couple of minutes."
"The most valuable feature is the security, making sure that files are protected, preventing unauthorized users from accessing the system."
"We can host any DB or application on the solution."
"Learning mode and custom policies are helpful features."
"Very scalable and very stable firewall for web applications, with a good interface in its cloud version. Mitigation is its most valuable feature. The technical support for this product is also good."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"The compliance is the most valuable aspect."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"I am impressed with the product's scalability, availability, easy management, and security. We were able to integrate the product with Azure and Sentinel."
"Data masking is the most valuable feature of this solution."
 

Cons

"It is sometimes a lot of work going through the rules and making sure you have everything covered for a use case. It is just the way rules are set and maintained in this solution. Some UI changes will probably be helpful. It is not easy to find the documentation of new features. Documentation not being updated is a common problem with all services, including this one. You have different versions of the console, and the options shown in the documentation are not there. For a new feature, there is probably an announcement about being released, but when it comes out, there is no actual documentation about how to use it. This makes you either go to technical support or community, which probably doesn't have an idea either. The documentation on the cloud should be the latest one. Finding information about a specific event can be a bit challenging. For this solution, not much documentation is available in the community. It could be because it is a new tool. Whenever there is an issue, it is just not that simple to resolve, especially if you don't have premium support. You have pretty much nowhere to look around, and you just need to poke around to try and make it work right."
"We don't have much control over blocking, because the WAF is managed by AWS."
"This solution could be improved if the configuration steps were more specific to WAF, compared to other cloud services."
"AWS WAF should provide better protection to its users, and the security features need to improve."
"The product must provide more features."
"It will be helpful if the product recommends rules that we can implement."
"We need more support as we go global."
"The cost must be reduced."
"The tool's UI is complicated. It would be best to have a more accessible UI dashboard to make the job easier."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that."
"Their portal is very limited and needs improvement."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
"It's a complicated tool to keep."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size. Learning capability of the device is quite weak."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is affordable."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"AWS WAF costs $5 monthly plus $1 for the rule. It's cheap, cost-wise. It's worth the money."
"The price of AWS WAF is expensive if you do not know how to manage your software up or down. I price of the solution is average amongst the other competitors but it would be better if it was less expensive."
"AWS WAF has reasonable pricing."
"I would rate AWS WAF's pricing a seven out of ten."
"Its price is fair. There is a very fair amount that they charge. It has a pay-as-you-go model, so it pretty much depends on how much a user uses it. As per the cloud norms, the more you use, the more you pay. I would rate it a five out of ten in terms of pricing."
"There are different scale options available for WAF."
"Everybody complains about the price of this solution."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is expensive."
"The pricing is somewhat expensive. It is actually a huge investment when compared to other countries."
"Licensing can range from one to twenty thousand dollars annually. Additionally, some features, including software support, require an annual subscription as well."
"It is a very affordable solution."
"There are some licenses that you have to buy to use some features. Its price could be better. Price is always important because, at the end of the day, customers have a budget. If you can meet the budget, you can sell, and if you don't, you cannot sell."
"There is a license for this solution and we purchase the license annually with no additional fees."
"The price is high compared to other solutions like FortiWeb."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What do you like most about AWS WAF?
The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system.
Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
DDoS solutions: Any other solutions to consider aside from Radware DefensePro and F5 Silverline DDoS Protection?
You can have a look to Imperva Cloud WAF, the anti-DDoS mitigation is under 1s and works very well. I observed a lot of DDoS attacks that were well managed (even not seen by the customer) by Imperv...
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
BlueCross BlueShield, eHarmony, EMF Broadcasting, GE Healthcare, Metro Bank, The Motley Fool, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.