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

Imperva Web Application Firewall vs Rapid7 AppSpider comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Imperva Web Application Fir...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (7th)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Imperva Web Application Firewall and Rapid7 AppSpider aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Imperva Web Application Firewall is designed for Web Application Firewall (WAF) and holds a mindshare of 5.8%, down 6.7% compared to last year.
Rapid7 AppSpider, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 0.5% mindshare, down 0.5% since last year.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Mitesh D Patel - PeerSpot reviewer
Effectively defends against threats like cross-site scripting (XSS), SQL injection, and others
It does bring value. For example, consider a BFSI customer. Their application is critical and represents their brand. Without a WAF, an attack could take their application down, harming their reputation. It leads to hampering the customer's workflow. With an Imperva WAF, they protect against attacks like DDoS or SQL injection, ensuring their application remains available and customers are happy. That's the main benefit for both the customer and the organization. The impact depends on the customer's use case. If their business primarily operates online, a CDN is beneficial for traffic optimization. Moreover, the integration options depend on the specific use case of our customers. Generally, integration capabilities are good with SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) parts.
Rizwan-Alam - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy automated web app scanning, but gives many false positives and isn't always stable
One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions. This is the main aspect that I hope to see Rapid7 improve on. Beyond reducing false positives, I would also like to see them implement better reporting features, particularly in the executive summary type of reports which need to be user-friendly and easily understood by non-technical people. The recommendations and solutions on these reports could always be improved to make them more relevant, too. Lastly, the stability isn't that great, and sometimes it becomes non-responsive. I feel like the stability of the application is very average and currently needs more work.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"There are many features. There is ease of deployment. You can deploy the Imperva Web Application Firewall in two to three minutes. After that, you have to set the policies. For setting policies, you have toggle buttons. You can turn something on or off."
"The solution is scalable."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"Protection is the best solution since it has profile functionality."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"Its inline transferring mode is the most valuable because it is 100% transparent. When you change the IP, there is no change on the network side. If you can't and want to try to reach an IP, you can reach the server IP. There are many other advanced security features in it. The smallest appliances of Imperva can handle the highest traffic at a customer site. For example, a smaller appliance from Imperva can provide you the same security as an F5 product."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
"One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"The initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
"The solution is highly stable, rated at ten out of ten."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"It scans all the components developed within a web application."
 

Cons

"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"I don't really use it and therefore can't speak to areas of improvement."
"There is nothing specific where the application firewall is falling short."
"It is complicated to integrate the solution's on-cloud version with other platforms."
"The process to upgrade from one version to another can be a lot simpler than it is currently."
"It would be helpful to have a "recommended deployment", or even a list of basic features that should either be used or turned on by default."
"The only disadvantage of Imperva is that it is a pretty costly solution."
"It's a complicated tool to keep."
"For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
"The product needs to be able to scale for large companies, like ours. We have millions of IP addresses that need to be scanned, and the scalability is not great."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"This price of this solution is a little bit expensive."
"The enterprise interface is too simple. It should be more customizable."
"Integration could be better."
"The performance of the solution could improve. When I compare the speed it is slower than others on the market. There are some tricks we use to help speed up the solution."
"The dashboard and interface are crucial and they need some improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Everybody complains about the price of this solution."
"The pricing is somewhat expensive. It is actually a huge investment when compared to other countries."
"There is a license for this solution and we purchase the license annually with no additional fees."
"Make sure you understand the way that Imperva charges. It's very affordable. However, I would like to see a package with the Virtual Patching included. You get to do patching separately."
"There are a couple of different licensing models."
"There are some licenses that you have to buy to use some features. Its price could be better. Price is always important because, at the end of the day, customers have a budget. If you can meet the budget, you can sell, and if you don't, you cannot sell."
"It is a very affordable solution."
"Imperva’s pricing is a bit higher in the market since it offers a full-blown WAF."
"The price of Rapid7 AppSpider cost 9,000 annually but there is limited usage. Large companies are able to negotiate a better price or a better deal for the usage with the vendor."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"The price is pretty fair."
"The licensing cost depends on the number of users."
"It is expensive if you want to buy the Enterprise version that is able to scan multiple applications at once."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
DDoS solutions: Any other solutions to consider aside from Radware DDoS Protection Service and F5 Silverline DDoS Protection?
You can have a look to Imperva Cloud WAF, the anti-DDoS mitigation is under 1s and works very well. I observed a lot of DDoS attacks that were well managed (even not seen by the customer) by Imperv...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 AppSpider?
The price is not high, but for Japanese customers, localization may incur additional costs.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 AppSpider?
For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 AppSpider?
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments.
 

Also Known As

No data available
AppSpider
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BlueCross BlueShield, eHarmony, EMF Broadcasting, GE Healthcare, Metro Bank, The Motley Fool, Siemens
Microsoft
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: June 2025.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.