We performed a comparison between Check Point DDoS Protector and Imperva DDoS 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."Check Point detects and automatically mitigates attacks, which helps our organization protect our infrastructure."
"As our business continues to grow, we can grow this product simultaneously."
"Check Point DDoS Protector is a product that uses machine learning and behavior analysis."
"It uses several layers of security."
"From my experience, the best part of this solution is behavioral DDoS protection. The DDoS Protector can monitor the traffic, and based on the behavior, it can decide which traffic is malicious and which traffic is regular. It works dynamically, and it's a very good solution."
"It can be deployed as a hardware appliance, virtual appliance, or as a cloud service."
"The is a really low level of the false-positive alerts (when the clean traffic is marked as DDoS) due to some advanced techniques used by Check Point under the hood."
"Currently, we have fewer incidents with viruses. We improved our IQ operations and security using this solution. Our company's better after using Check Point."
"Imperva DDoS is fairly stable, and its availability is quite high."
"Imperva Incapsula has many valuable features. One, it protects the top 10 OWAS vulnerability, the open web application software platform, this is standard. Secondly, it protects against broken authentication. As well, it has remote execution of code."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"It blocks all types of attacks."
"The most valuable features are DDoS protection."
"The solution has a very good interface."
"There are quite a few useful Imperva Incapsula features. For example, one of them is the reports. The graphics are very good and it's easy to configure. The whole process is very fast and reliable too. They have good tech support as well."
"The setup of Imperva DDoS was easy."
"Monitoring and reporting are the things that can be introduced in the future."
"The solution should greatly improve its interface."
"Check Point should develop a DDoS solution because they don't have one and we need to use another solution, in our case, Imperva. This is a problem because we need to have two firewalls. We would like to only have one solution because it would improve the management, we would have fewer incidents, and we wouldn't need to talk to more than one person for support."
"It does not provide the capability to upload data for blacklisting/whitelisting in bulk."
"Check Point DDoS Protector does not provide the ability to upload data for the blacklist/whitelist in bulk, which is one of the big points that need to be improved to facilitate configurations."
"The mitigation part could be improved."
"The Check Point support language is only in English."
"I would like applications for Android and IOS where we can follow the events, and, if necessary, make changes."
"I miss being able to integrate the dashboard with other BI tools we are using. We have to export and import data to be able to present it, and doing so is a lot of work."
"The weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."
"Users would benefit from better documentation. There is official documentation, but sometimes we need more detail. We have some use cases that are not so run of the mill. It would be great if there was a knowledge base that we could go to for more answers."
"We would like them to hire people in Sweden because it's quite hard when people are sitting in the UK or Belgium because some of the customers really want them to be local."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"The solution needs to improve Integration with third parties for their on-prem deployment models. The integration is not that good yet."
"Analytics in the area of risk need to be improved to supply more information to the users for creating better environments."
"Imperva now offers add-ons to add functionality, but I would like to see these included in the product, even if it would cost more."
Check Point DDoS Protector is ranked 12th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 11 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 5th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. Check Point DDoS Protector is rated 8.0, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Check Point DDoS Protector writes "Good support and effective against SSL attacks, but the dashboard is complicated". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". Check Point DDoS Protector is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Fortinet FortiDDoS and Akamai App and API Protector, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF. See our Check Point DDoS Protector vs. Imperva DDoS 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.