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."It offers some feedback and suggestions that guide our system development while helping our vendors to update their applications and fix any issues or bugs."
"We find that it is quite stable and reliable."
"It helps us prevent attacks on servers."
"FortiWeb's ease of deployment is what we liked the most about it. Implementing ForitWeb was extremely fast and easy, which was a significant advantage. It comes with several preconfigured rule sets and templates."
"Provides good vulnerability scanning, IPS, and geolocalization."
"The anti-defacement feature is very useful because it looks for web changes over time to protect pages."
"FortiWeb offers a good price for the marketplace. In the Sri Lankan market, it's hard to find high-end products that can match FortiWeb's pricing. For high-end solutions, the price is always extremely high."
"The support services, performance, and pricing are all valuable features. The performance is excellent."
"It has fewer false positives"
"There are a number of features that are valuable such as the account takeover and various antivirus features."
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"The features I have found most valuable with Imperva Web Application Firewall are account takeover protection, advanced bot protection, and API security."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"The solution can scale."
"Fortinet FortiWeb could improve in reference architecture for different deployment scenarios."
"The solution could improve by being able to handle different use cases."
"If the price was lower, it would be a bit more attractive, as an option, to the customers."
"Fortinet FortiWeb could improve data integration."
"Their documentation is fairly complete, but it's sometimes a little bit difficult to search for exactly what you're looking for to resolve an issue. There have been times when we've gone to try to search for areas that we needed to get information on, and it has not always been extremely clear exactly how a particular thing needs to be set up."
"Lacks a VM demo to enable testing prior to purchase."
"Sometimes, even if you follow the documentation, it doesn't work as expected."
"The solution could have more customization."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"I am looking for more data enrichment. We should have the ability to add our own custom data to the system, to the live traffic."
"I don't really use it and therefore can't speak to areas of improvement."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is a good system, but we found that the visibility of the diverse-path server, e.g. where the traffic is coming from, the different IPs, etc., needs improvement."
"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."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"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."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 35 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 20 reviews. Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "It comes with several preconfigured rule sets and templates that make deploying new applications easier". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Simple to maintain, easy to configure, and easy to scale". Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, Fortinet FortiOS, AWS WAF and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Azure Front Door and Imperva DDoS. 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.
