Imperva Web Application Firewall Reviews

I am a distributor for Imperva. We provide solutions for our customers. 

This solution is mainly used to protect websites. When it is deployed on the cloud it is used for traffic redirection and URL redirection functionality.

It is also used for dual location blocking and security for the policies that are being applied.

Imperva is a good solution.

It has fewer false positives. It is very simple to maintain the device. It is also simple to configure. You don't need to have any HTTP knowledge or understand the HTTP programming languages when it comes to configuring the device.

The visibility of the actual traffic needs to be improved. 

We are only monitoring the traffic if there are any issues and the alerts are being triggered. 

We don't log the real-time traffic. We only log the real-time attacks and not the normal traffic that is passing through the device.

The main concern for our customers is to improve the visibility of the actual traffic. Customers feel that is the one feature that will greatly improve Imperva. 

They would like to have the complete network traffic passing through the device. Currently, we are only being alerted for the attack that has passed through the device instead of the genuine traffic.

We would like to see logs of the genuine traffic that passes through the device. It can be optional to enable it for certain customers and certain applications but should be included.

The support for the on-premises version needs improvement.

We have been distributing Imperva for the last 10 years.

We are currently dealing with the latest version.

We provide both on-premises and cloud deployment, it depends on the customer's requirement.

Once it is configured it is stable. There are no issues with the stability of the Imperva Web Application Firewall.

It is easy to scale. The scalability is fine. You can add gateways and scale, which is a good feature in Imperva.

This device is suitable for everyone.

There are two different support teams. The cloud support is very good, but the on-premises support is lacking. The response time could be much better.

The initial setup is easy if you know how to deploy Imperva. Once we do the base installation, the deployment is simple.

Once in six months, there are some patch upgrades required. If there are specific requirements we need to upgrade.

We were able to complete the installation and deployment ourselves.

When it comes to the cost, there are different sets of customers. Some are SMB and veteran customers who go with the cloud version of Imperva, which is a managed service. The next-level customers and enterprise will select the on-premises version along with the cloud. They prefer the hybrid environment.

There are a couple of different licensing models. One is with respect to the Cloud and is based on the number of applications you have to protect. The on-premises model is based on the throughput that is required to be inspected.

I know that FortiGate is a niche product and wanted to evaluate Impera and FortiGate for the differences.

You should understand the customer's website, what their website is. They need to configure the ciphers properly. Many engineers are not able to complete the project because they don't understand the customer's environment. 

Before doing an implementation, understand the customer's environment. The ciphers need to be configured properly. Some Imperva engineers are not able to complete the projects because they understand the customer's environment.

Know the ciphers being used and match the ciphers. You must ensure the same ciphers are being matched in the backend load balances. If the backend load or cipher is changed the same should be replicated in Imperva as well. Once this is complete it should be good.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for database security.

Basically, the solution is a web application firewall that is used to protect against multiple types of attacks online. It is used for web attacks - mostly DDoS attacks, cross-site scripting attacks, or SQL injection attacks. 

There is also multiple HTTP protocol compliance. If there is any violation it will be detected by this application. It is used for detecting an illegal file type, illegal URL, or bots. 

The solution can prevent a geolocation attack also. If any application is not allowed from certain countries, it will not allow access. We can detect everything via the web application firewall. 

The solution offers good security against a variety of web attacks.

The protection from DDoS attacks is very useful. The DDoS attack is a very powerful attack that can harm a company's services. If an application is deployed to any web server or database our service will slow and will go down. A user would not be able to access our service until we can fix the issue. It's a deal if a company can avoid getting hit with DDoS attacks and having something that can effectively protect a company is extremely useful.

The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all.

Until now, it is good. There are no issues. As an analyst, I simply monitor. I don't really get too far into the technical aspects of the solution.

Occasionally, I've noticed that the web application firewall was down. If we are not using proper storage, proper memory, proper CPU, and if multiple attacks happen at one time, they will be detected by our web application firewall. Sometimes our web application firewall will slow down. In that sense, it needs some improvement. We do have a precaution for if the solution goes down. We basically, need to increase the memory and the storage and the CPU utilization, so that we can prevent our company from malicious activity. 

I cannot say which type of memory or storage should be improved. The requirements depend on the organization. What organizations need and which type of configurations would work best as per their requirements depend completely on that.

I've been working with the solution for about three years or so. It's been a while. I've been mostly working with it over the last 12 months or so.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches - or at least, I haven't seen any problems on that front. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

Right now, it depends on the company and its needs. I can't speak to if there are plans to increase usage.

I've never been in touch with technical support. I can't speak to how knowledgeable and responsive they are, having never communicated with them directly. As an analyst, it's not my responsibility to deal with technical issues directly.

It's my understanding that this company has only used this solution. However, if I move somewhere else, it's possible that something else may be used.

I wasn't part of the initial setup. I can't speak to how easy or difficult the process was.

I am not sure of the exact licensing costs of the solution. The licensing is a management decision. The costs and payments are handled by them.

We use the solution's latest version.

We have a partnership with Imperva within our company.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been mostly quite happy with its capabilities.

We have an Akamai cloud-based solution for it. We have an in-house customer, and they have their own Akamai cloud for WAF. As a solution provider, we are working with their private Akamai WAF. 

Configuration for different application sources is most valuable. We can segregate the traffic that an application is carrying and identify the sizing in Imperva.

It is quite proficient in terms of logs reports, and it provides tight control for policy configuration. So, there can't be any unwanted applications on the internal LAN site. It is quite restrictive, which is a plus point. The sizing of an application is quite easy to understand while we are configuring and deploying Imperva.

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 have about two to three years of experience with Imperva. I'm working as a GA consultant for cybersecurity and information security. I'm working on different security solutions such as WAF, IAM, DDoS, Azure firewall proxy, and antivirus. I work with different customers, and I also do the architecture review or assessment.

Its stability is quite good. It is not at all an issue. 

It is also quite good performance-wise. We are confident about its performance.

It is for large-scale enterprises where the traffic is huge, and there are many internet-facing applications, which is a plus point of Imperva.

We don't have the HA mode for the respective solution in Imperva, which has to be there when we have the DC and DR locations. We can activate only one solution at DC, but while we are conducting the drills between DC and DR, it is quite difficult to import all the configurations at the DR location in Imperva. It takes time.

Their support is good. It is not an issue. Whenever we have any questions or concerns, we're getting an appropriate solution for our queries. 

Some of the clients have had direct support from Imperva, and some of the clients had a third-party vendor. We also get support from a local Imperva employee. When I was working for a bank, there was good support from this person who was working with Imperva. 

The support for the setup is very good from the provider, but it can be difficult for an engineer to have an in-depth understanding of the configuration of a policy for an application.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

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. 

They can provide an option to create a report, automatically import the entire report, and create rules again. In a real-life crisis, it would be helpful to be able to import a report and generate security rules from that report. I should be able to create a simple query and import the reports automatically. It can maybe also tell us the format of the report.

I have been using this solution for more than nine years.

It is very stable.

It is easy to scale up.

After nine years with Imperva, we know mostly everything about it, and we are using it very deeply. None of the support can handle us when it comes to R&D. They are able to help us with all other categories.

The initial setup is very easy. You can just plug it in, and it asks you some questions about the IP address, DNS, SSL, etc. After that, it asks you for license codes, and everything is online. It is easy to deploy. You don't have to change any network configuration.

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.

In Turkey, we mostly have on-premises deployments. There are some Azure Amazon projects, but it is mostly deployed on-premises. It is not so easy to send Incapsula solutions to Turkey.

I would recommend this solution. It is easy to manage and expand. I would rate Imperva SecureSphere Web Application Firewall a ten out of ten. 

My experience is to integrate this application. It's a firewall. You must connect it with the traffic the infrastructure must be routed through this firewall in order to block and search for any problems with the applications.

As a system, it's very effective at blocking potentially malicious items. The security is very good.

The solution can scale.

The stability has been pretty good.

Technical support is helpful.

The initial setup is rather straightforward.

In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy.

I've been working with the solution for about three years or so.

I have previously found bugs within the solution and in the past, I have contacted Imperva in order to deal with them to get them resolved.

That said, for the most part, I have found the solution to be quite stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. It works well. 

The solution can scale.

We typically deal with medium-sized enterprises as clients. Typically, these companies have around 500,000 or so employees. They aren't massive, however, they are quite sizeable. 

I've dealt with technical support on multiple occasions and I find them to be very helpful and responsive. They are knowledgeable. We're very happy with the level of service we get. 

The initial setup is straightforward, although it does take time to integrate the solution into your existing infrastructure.

As an integrator, I can help clients set up the solution at their companies.

I'm not sure what the exact licensing costs are for the solution. I can't speak to the pricing. It's not part of my responsibilities to cover sales or billing.

Imperva has different three parts - the Web Application Firewall (WAF), Incapsula for cloud, and DAM for database firewalls. This is in one central monitor.

We aren't using the latest version of the solution.

We use the solution as a customer as well as an integrator.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's very good. We've been quite happy with its overall capabilities.

The product is very good. 

It's so easy to do the deployment. The installation is very straightforward. You can't even compare it to others on the market. It's that easy.

The features on offer are very nice.

The solution is stable.

The licensing setup makes the product easy to scale. 

The pricing is very good. 

I loved the approach of the cloud. The cloud has a lot of new features, like advanced web protection and DDoS protection. If those could also be on-boarded onto the on-prem versions, that would be ideal. They need to pay attention to both deployment options and not just favor one. 

I've been using the solution for the last five years. I've used it for quite a while now. 

The stability of the product is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

We typically deal with medium-sized organizations.

The licensing model makes the solution very simple to scale. If a company wants to expand, it's not a problem.

We need an improvement in the support. We need a lot of turnarounds. Whenever is a ticket open, it's something that has become a concern. 

I'm not currently working with any other solution. I just use this product. 

Previously, I did work with F5 and Fortinet. However, Imperva is superior to both of these products.

The initial setup is easy and the solution is very simple to deploy.

The solution is very affordable and the cloud is making it even easier in terms of cost savings. 

We are resellers and we are based in Kenya. We're actually doing the whole suite. I'm working with Database Security and I'm also doing the Web Application Firewall, both of which are on-prem and on the cloud. I'm also doing the DRA.

It's the best in breed in terms of a solution you can put in place.

I'd rate the solution at an nine out of ten. We're quite happy with its overall capabilities. 

Our primary use case is for protection of all our web applications.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is a very good solution and very feasible for any corporation. We can almost accommodate everything with this solution. We were able to accommodate almost all our use cases with this. This is one of the best solutions I have found so far.

The features I have found most valuable with Imperva Web Application Firewall are account takeover protection, advanced bot protection, and API security.

In terms of what could be improved, I would say reporting on the cloud side.

Additionally, 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.

In the next release I would like to see more API security.

I have been using Imperva Web Application Firewall for almost five years.

We currently use a hybrid version but we are moving towards purely 100% cloud where we will shortly get rid of all the appliances.

Its stability is very good. In all aspects, it is very good. It is beyond my expectations actually.

In terms of scaling, Imperva Web Application Firewall is amazing. The product is really good so far.

We have very few users with direct usage - 10 users approximately.

There is zero maintenance.

Their customer support is very good. They are very quick.

I previously used F5 and something else whose name I don't remember.

We made the switch to Imperva because it is one of the best solutions on the market.

The initial setup is very easy.

It just took a few days.

We used the consultant. Our experience with them was not bad. But as I mentioned, things are not difficult here. It is fairly easy.

My advice to anyone considering Imperva Web Application Firewall is that they can safely go to this environment without having a second thought. I have done so much testing. I did so many use cases. It never failed so far.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Imperva Web Application Firewall a 10.

We are a solution provider and Imperva is one of the products that we implement for our clients. They use it as an application firewall.

If you are using the appliance as opposed to the virtual deployment, it can stand as the network layer-two and provide real transparency. This is better than the competitors.

Imperva SecureSphere integrates well with other tools.

The user interface could be better.

I have been working with Imperva SecureSphere for about four years.

Imperva solutions are the best in terms of stability.

I have not faced any trouble with scalability because you can easily upgrade the appliance. 

I am regularly in contact with Imperva support and I am satisfied with them.

The initial setup is very basic and really easy to do. I wouldn't say that everybody, such as non-technical, people can do the setup and configuration. However, people with a mid-level of experience in application firewalls can do it easily.

The price of this solution is a little bit high compared to competitors.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is that if they want a stable product with good scalability then they can choose Imperva. The price is a little bit higher than that of the competitors, which largely impacts whether customers choose Imperva. In fact, if you don't care about budget then Imperva is the only solution for an application firewall.

My only complaint is that the user interface could be better.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.