Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025
Imperva Web Application Firewall and Azure Front Door compete in the web security and content delivery network category. Imperva seems to have the upper hand with its comprehensive security features despite challenges in UI, while Azure Front Door is favored for global application deployment and user-friendly configuration but faces some limitations in load balancing.
Features: Imperva Web Application Firewall offers threat radar for detecting potential attacks, seamless integration with existing systems, and robust DDoS protection. On the other hand, Azure Front Door provides extensive CDN capabilities, effective bot protection to prevent automated cyber threats, and efficient load balancing, making it particularly appealing for managing traffic across multiple regions.
Room for Improvement: Users of Imperva indicate that policy management could be streamlined, the complex UI can be confusing, and there are concerns about false positives. Azure Front Door users suggest enhancing global load balancing capabilities and providing better clarification of product functionalities, as some features may not be intuitive for all users.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Imperva offers versatility with both on-premises and cloud deployments but some users find the complexity challenging. Its technical support receives praise, though delays occur at times. Azure Front Door is primarily cloud-based, making its deployment relatively straightforward, though it might require additional localized support due to certain technical issues.
Pricing and ROI: Imperva is perceived as expensive but offers substantial ROI, particularly in sectors like banking. Its hybrid environment support allows for variable pricing based on selected protection levels. Azure Front Door provides a pay-as-you-go model with flexible tiers, which can become costly if premium features are selected, but users value the competitive balance of features and pricing.
