Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS WAF vs R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
R&S Web Application Firewal...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
35th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 13.8%, down from 15.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is 0.3%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Rohit Kesharwani - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 24, 2024
A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks
We use AWS WAF to protect our application from different kinds of attacks. We use AWS WAF for retail customers Our retail application is vulnerable to a lot of bot attacks. AWS WAF helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection that happen within the retail industry. The…
SS
Mar 3, 2020
Geo-localization and IP reputation help to keep our clients secure and more available
One of our customers needed to publish a web application. Since the customer had a platform that included a Hyper-V cluster, we chose the virtual version of the appliance. We have deployed the WAF (web application Firewall) in reverse proxy mode to protect the published web application with the…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS WAF is very easy to use and configure on AWS."
"Rule groups are valuable."
"This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information."
"The customized billing is the most valuable feature."
"As a basic WAF, it's better than nothing. So if you need something simple out of the box with default features, AWS WAF is good."
"The most valuable features of AWS WAF are its cloud-native and on-demand."
"Its best feature is that it is on the cloud and does not require local hardware resources."
"It's simple, easy to use."
"The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see improvements in its usability and functionality. I'm also concerned about being too dependent on the cloud provider's WAF version. For security, using multiple vendors and not putting all our eggs in one basket is better."
"When users choose the free service, there isn't great support available to them."
"The cost must be reduced."
"The product could be improved by expanding the weightage units of rules."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad bots"
"It would be good if the solution provided managed WAF services."
"I would like to be able to view a graphical deployment map in the user interface that will give me an overview of the configuration and help to determine whether I have missed any steps."
"The area that should be improved is licensing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS WAF has reasonable pricing."
"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."
"You need an additional AWS subscription for this product if you are buying a managed tool."
"For our infrastructure, we probably pay around $16,000 per month for AWS WAF. Because alternative WAF solutions provide even more features, I think the AWS WAF is a bit pricey"
"The pricing is good and manageable."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven or eight out of ten."
"The price of AWS WAF is reasonable, it is not expensive and it is not cheap."
"It has a variable pricing scheme."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
813,418 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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.
Which Web Application Firewall (WAF) would you recommend? R&S or Imperva?
Imperva is a strong choice, given their security focus and ongoing R&D into the product in areas such as bot management.
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
Rohde & Schwarz Web Application Firewall, R&S WAF, DenyAll Web Application Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2024.
813,418 professionals have used our research since 2012.