Radware Alteon Reviews

Our primary use case of this solution is for security for the data center. We have a private on-prem deployment model.

The most valuable aspect is that it establishes user security. 

The hardware is strong, we don't have any failures. 

I would like for the load balancing to work with premier and the cloud, a mix of premium and cloud.

It is a stable hardware. 

We haven't contact technical support yet. 

The initial setup was straightforward and simple. 

It's very expensive but it's worth it for the computer, system, and network.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. I would recommend it. 

I am a consultant, and I have customers who purchase Alteon Box. I help them with the design and architecture. The primary use case is mainly for load balancing internal applications, for internal-facing customers, as well as external customers on the internet.

The most valuable features are the load-balancing and reverse proxy. Global-loadbalancing as well is valuable.

For a migration from F5 to Radware, the conversion of certain features is challenging :

1. From F5 ASM policies to Radware Appwall policies, we had to require support from professional services although the F5 ASM policy was basic.

2. Radware does not seem to support TLS extensions in the client_hello therefore migration of F5 scripts that was handing sessions with TLS extensions is a challenge.

3. overall migration of F5 scripts and specific configuration like profiles is a challenge

With the example above a radware conversion tool that would migrate scripts and configuration or from other vendor to Radware would be a real asset. Support of TLS extension would facilitate deployment with that scenario as well.

I have been working with Radware Alteon for approximately three years.

I find it to be stable. To date, we have not had any issues with it.

I have not had a chance to work on a scenario where we really carried a lot. 

I am working on a project now where there are more applications going through Radware. Just now we are going to see how it works, regarding the scalability. It appears to be scalable but I can't tell you at this time.

Radware Alteon is used by the administrator, the network integrator, the people that are managing, and the internal management team and they seems comfortable with the learning curve an the handling of the solution.

My experience with technical support is that they were great. We also had engineers that know the product help to resolve the issue.

Our clients have replaced F5 with Radware Alteon.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We have a group of four to deploy and maintain this solution.

I design with Radware. I design myself and work with a team to integrate it.

I don't implement it as an integrator.

Yes, Forti ADC

For anyone who is considering using this solution with application security or complex used case. I would suggest that they talk to professional services. I would recommend they work with professional services depending on the project complexity, and if it's migration, for instance, the scripting around the Radware is not something people would be familiar with. Professional services would be able to help with the scripting.

I would rate Radware Alteon a nine out of ten.

I like the concept of self-service in which I can do everything on my own. 

They are very competitive with the price. Their solution could be successful in other organizations but they're not mature as an API solution. It has a nice dashboard, you can watch clean traffic coming to the end service but the reporting requires more improvement.

With self-service, we can use a lot of the features on our own but some of the features didn't work and nothing was done about it. We stopped using it because the application failed. We tried to improve some processes but we still got a lot of false positives. We tried to work with the vendor to fix it but it didn't work out.

False positives are a big issue for all of the WAF vendors. No one is 100% okay, it requires a lot of monitoring and fine-tuning. But the reason that I didn't work is because some of the services didn't work as I expected and they didn't fix it. They didn't give me answers to some of the issues that we raised again. So we weren't so happy. So we decided to look at other vendors that would please our stockholders but Coronavirus postponed our plans. 

I have worked in this industry for a long time and I think there are benefits of using a WAF. It requires a lot of understanding of the product.

I had been using Radware for three years until this April. This product was running before I arrived at my company. I was the owner of it for the last year and I wasn't happy with the results.

We had one incident that we discovered some stability in some regions in which their service wasn't responsive and we have to notify them. Compared to other vendors, they are not at the top in API.

We don't have any problems with scalability, because they're a worldwide solution. They can populate your service all over the world.

I believe Akamai has a big network because they also working with CDN. So they know how to handle huge traffic. 

We get good responses from them but not all of the responses solved the issue. I also tried to work with the customer success manager, but eventually, this failed because there was a long history of false positives before I arrived. The stakeholder wasn't so happy with the solution. We had a bad history with and nothing got resolved with the support, so we made a decision not to continue with them.

Radware is good, but if there is a full preparation from the beginning. I worked with the on-prem solution and it was good. But now, there are many players in the market. And I think they have a faster response. They are not the only player in the market. Once you are not happy with one, you can move to another.

Their support could improve. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

In the next release, they should offer the ability to illustrate KPIs using a graph. Radware needs to have visibility on the dashboard to demonstrate the benefit of using the application firewall like, how much bandwidth you saved by using the AppWall. I tried to use the graph, but sometimes it wasn't so clear. I think they have to work a lot on reporting and visibility because it's the fastest way to show the value for other people that are not graph experts.

Load balancing data traffic.

Centralized visibility into app health and performance.

Resources per application: You can dedicate to a business-critical app or multiple apps.

Marketing of the product.

The solution basically protects the web applications of our customers.

The features that mitigate attacks are very valuable.

The GUI needs to be improved. Right now, the solution isn't so user-friendly.

I've been using the solution for five years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The solution's technical support is excellent.

The initial setup is very straightforward. Deployment times vary, but it typically only takes a few hours.

We're a vendor that sells solutions to customers. We're using all the AppWall products of Radware including the AppWall Cloud. Typically we deal with the on-premises and hybrid deployment models. We do testing for our customers and sell the solution, but don't use the solution in our company ourselves.

If customers are looking for a WAF solution, they need to look at the Radware WAF to be able to protect them. Radware also offers a hybrid technology so that users can don on-prem and cloud deployments.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Security is one of the most valuable features that I like. It is easy to use and easy to configure. The hardware is robust. 

Support is very important because if we get good support, we'll be able to sell and supply more numbers.

Sophos and Cisco they have very good support, that's why they're able to sell large numbers as compared to Radware.

We have been using AppWall for the last five to six years. 

It is stable.

We haven't tried to scale up yet. 

To some extent, we are satisfied with the technical support but it can be better- it can be much better.

The initial setup is easy, it's not difficult. It can take a few hours. 

I would definitely recommend Radware. It is a stable product. 

We are looking for SMB solutions that are cheaper and more economical. We could acquire a smaller number of clients that way. So SMB products that have good features on the firewall, speed, and security would be important. Radware is a very good company and I think it can easily beat other competitors like Sophos if they have good products in SMB range also. For enterprise, they already have two products.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use this solution for web application load balancing.

We use it because we have several servers and we needed to distribute the traffic.

The interface is easy, it's friendly, and has good alerting. When you have a problem with a server, it will alert you.

It is useful in many areas, especially for web applications and load balancing. It's something that the customer can see on the internet.

Support is an area that needs improvement. They need to have better response times.

I have been using this solution for a year and a half.

Technical support takes too long to respond. Sometimes you need a quick response.

I would rate them a five out of ten.

The initial setup was easy.

We have a shared implementation. We work with a partner here in Ecuador.

For others who are interested in using this solution, I would say that it is necessary to take the time to input the correct dimensions of the equipment.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

This product has helped us manage TLS and SSL traffic as a load balancer with security features. Radware Alteon provides the majority of popular HTTP/S features which are really helpful for managing Web services.

I am finding SSL-TLS acceleration the most valuable function, with certificate management. It is easy to generate certificates and assign them to services. The support is really good, the training offered is also valuable.

The ease of use is a must for improvement, some areas are way too complicated without need, and they are confusing users.

Also, sometimes updates to trending vulnerabilities are a bit late.

I would rate it at eight out of 10. I have been using a VM appliance that has been really easy to set up, but a bit difficult to upgrade and change configuration afterwards.