We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiWeb and Imperva Web Application Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are support and security."
"It's easy to use and allows us to integrate solutions together."
"One of the big advantages of using Fortinet FortiWeb is all the Fortinet family solutions use the same user interface and logic. This makes it easy to use, configure, manage, and understand if you have used one of their solutions before or are wanting to implement other Fortinet solutions in the future. Additionally, all Fortinet solutions can be managed with one application called FortiManager."
"SSL Offloading simplifies the public certificate handling and brings additional protection features."
"Fortinet FortiWeb has improved my organization by protecting our customer's web infrastructure environment."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"We were able to protect our web servers from outside attacks."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Fail-Open."
"There are a number of features that are valuable such as the account takeover and various antivirus features."
"If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"It has threat intelligence and we are using Incapsula. With threat intelligence, we can separate HTTP and HTTPS traffic. We can use Incapsula to send all the threat intelligence to the WAF."
"The compliance is the most valuable aspect."
"One good thing about Imperva Web Application Firewall is it can be on the cloud and also it can be on-premise."
"The solution is very scalable. It is one of the most important features. You can also expand resources and features as well."
"It has fewer false positives"
"A user interface or dashboard for troubleshooting is needed."
"The documentation for the machine learning could be better."
"The solution could offer more integration opportunities."
"The solution is rather complicated. If you know what to do, it's not bad, but it's complicated for a first time user to configure the solution. What I'd like to improve are the custom signatures."
"Integration and learning about attacks. I would improve these areas by making FortiWeb integrate with other network technologies and feedback from multiple platforms."
"The integration with other products should be improved."
"Fortinet WAF came out recently, and there is not much feedback about customer experience. For each project, customers ask about the scenarios and references of the customers who have implemented this solution, which we don't have. They need to simplify the customer experience and provide more information so that we can propose Fortinet Fortiweb as a WAF solution to customers and convince them. They need to improve their service and training. We need good training to implement and use it properly and know more about it. We still don't know much about Fortinet WAF. We didn't get any proper training sessions. Other vendors like Cisco, Palo Alto, Check Point, and Barracuda provide such sessions. Whenever we receive a request from a customer for this solution, we just give the price. We don't propose this solution because we don't know much about it. We propose whatever we are familiar with and what is supported."
"The solution is not very scalable, to scale up would require another deployment with a new appliance and a change to the network."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall can improve by adding more features to the dashboard. increasing the visibility of the real-time events, besides configuring the administration itself."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"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."
"The UI interface needs improvement."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 45 reviews. Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Azure Front Door and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our Fortinet FortiWeb vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.