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.

At my previous workplace in the banking sector, we used Imperva WAF for the monitoring of our internet banking traffic, and we also used Imperva's DAM for the database activity monitoring.

Our deployment of Imperva WAF was situated on-premises and it was in use throughout the whole organization, which included around 3,500 clients.

The WAF itself has been very valuable to me because it has such a complete range of features. Another reason why I like it is because it also takes care of the total overview of the traffic over the network.

Imperva's product is very good, but when it comes to procuring the software in my country it can be somewhat expensive. I don't recall the exact amount, but in comparison with other countries it is a huge investment.

They recently separated the WAF and the DAM management gateways in order for each of these to be managed from different areas, so I believe it now requires additional investments for what was previously a single complete solution.

Although the vendor support from Imperva is not bad, getting a response from them can be a lengthy process at times.

I have used Imperva WAF for about three years. 

The stability is mature enough, in my experience. In fact, I would give it a 5/5 for stability.

Scalability-wise, there is one issue we encountered that I want to mention. At some point, Imperva, moved their account takeover prevention features from the on-premises edition to the cloud-based edition, and we discovered that this step would take yet another integration, seeing that we were using Imperva on-premises. These account takeover prevention features, however, were already part of our subscription, but since the features moved to the cloud, we missed out on them. So, in this sense, I would say the scalability strategy isn't as solid as it should be, and for this reason I would rate the scalability a 3.5/5.

On the other hand, when it comes to how many users we were able to scale up to, we actually had the whole organization using it, including around 3,500 clients in total.

The support from the vendor side could be improved because their response times weren't great and the process of obtaining the proper support was a long process sometimes. That said, the support itself was not bad.

Positive

The setup was actually quite an advanced process. It was a good experience, but all in all it took about one year to get everything fully set up, when you take all the fine-tuning activities and such into account.

We deployed the Imperva WAF with the help of organizations in South Africa who acted as consultants and implementation partners for Imperva. Our experience with them was good, and the full implementation required two professionals from the consultant's side and about five people from our own organization. The vendor itself was not part of the implementation process.

The pricing is somewhat expensive. It is actually a huge investment when compared to other countries.

Not only that, but Imperva went on to separate the WAF and DAM management gateways, making it so that each would have to be managed and licensed separately, incurring the cost of additional investments.

On a related note, there was another licensing issue we encountered where we had a subscription for account takeover prevention features, but these features had been moved by Imperva from the on-premises instance to the cloud. Since we had not moved to the cloud at that point, we did not have access to these features anymore.

I can highly recommend Imperva WAF for financial institutions. It's a good solution and I think it's important for financial institutions, particularly those who conduct online banking, to make use of a solid WAF such as this.

I would rate Imperva WAF a nine 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.

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.

The mitigation feature is what I find most valuable in Imperva Web Application Firewall. The interface of the cloud version of this solution is also good.

Every product has a room for improvement, and in Imperva Web Application Firewall, we found a limitation when we need to check which email IP traffic is coming from, e.g. we cannot find it.

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. If we can populate those information, we can block them in our firewalls, and that would make this solution better.

Though the cloud interface of Imperva Web Application Firewall is good, the interface of the on-premises version is not as appealing, and it's what I'd like to see improved in the next release of this solution.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is a very stable solution.

The cloud version of Imperva Web Application Firewall is very scalable.

Technical support for this solution is good.

It's very easy to set up the cloud version of Imperva Web Application Firewall. It's not difficult, because you just need to map your DNS, and that's it. Setting up this solution is not a problem.

I'm working as a cyber security consultant and I provide Imperva Web Application Firewall and other similar solutions to customers.

We are working in the Middle East, e.g. we are deploying solutions to different organizations.

I don't have any input on the pricing for Imperva Web Application Firewall, as that part is covered by the research team.

I don't have advice for people looking into implementing this solution, except that everyone has different opinions and different requirements. Every organization has different requirements, and their choices will be based on their requirements. If all their requirements are fulfilled by Imperva Web Application Firewall, then they'll want to implement or use it.

I've giving Imperva Web Application Firewall a score of seven out of ten.