What needs improvement with Radware DDoS Protection Service?

There are areas where Radware DDoS could improve, specifically regarding centralized visibility. If someone is allowed access to one payment server but attempts to access the backend database and application servers from that source, we need to analyze the level of propagation. If they are performing suspicious activities such as random logins, it would be beneficial to have a centralized console that shows which IP is attempting which actions for greater visibility, enabling better analysis. To sum it up, we suggest that clear visibility within a management console could significantly enhance Radware DDoS's usability. We use Radware DDoS and Check Point for our public site because understanding the origin and pattern of public hits is crucial. If the console could segregate packets by type—such as HTTPS, logger, database-related queries, or other behavioral data—and generate reports accordingly, it would better aid our analysis.

There should be some extra layer of security and a method of advanced rate limiting. We can limit the number of IPs or URLs per session and per country. There should be improved bot management integration that mitigates bot-based DDoS attacks completely.

Their Cyber Security Controller portal, including its GUI and dashboard, could be more intuitive so CXOs can easily understand them. Improvements in visualization for reporting also need consideration. This feedback has already been provided directly to Radware DDoS Protection Service.

I want to improve the blocking time; it should be within 10 seconds because 18 seconds allows multiple transactions in the financial industry. I want the blocking time to be better than 18 seconds.

I think Radware DDoS Protection Service could be improved by enhancing the network analytics features.

I suggest improvements to the user interface to make it easier to use and to find the necessary data for analysis. Although the data is present, accessing it for analysis could be more simplified.

There's room for improvement in customization and integration. It would be better if routers and external firewalls could integrate with the solution. Additionally, when bugs are detected in a version during upgrades, there should be better communication about these bugs. They need to focus more on providing process documents highlighting bugs and their solutions. Sometimes there is leakage in the network. Attacks go through without getting detected. It's a deployment issue, not a Radware problem. We don't use it to its fullest capacity. Whenever there is an incident, it sometimes lacks the proper information about the attack, but most of the time, it's really reliable.

The time it takes to upload a site to the cloud is critical when under attack. If a site is down, a quick response to migrate the site to the cloud is essential. It currently takes about 15 to 20 minutes for the process to complete, which should be minimized.

The product is good, but the company could improve its services by appointing customer success managers. This would ensure better interaction with customers and help resolve issues on both customer and supplier ends. Most other security product companies such as Palo Alto and Forcepoint appoint customer success managers to interact with customers and ensure that the product they have purchased is used perfectly. If we are facing any kind of issues in using the product or service, the customer success manager should get things right.

The APSolute Vision feature needs improvement.

The rise of generative AI and machine learning in cyberattacks demands more advanced defense strategies. In this context, I'm interested in how Radware plans to leverage these same technologies to improve its detection and response capabilities.

To improve my ability to monitor security events, I would like Radware to strengthen its integration with SIEM for better logging capabilities.

We've been encountering a lack of updates in DefensePro. Currently, we're facing numerous bugs within our data solution. These bugs are impacting the failover process, and we're observing repeated crashes of the Elasticsearch container across various workflows. There's room for improvement in the clarity of the feedback provided by the command service in the CLI. Specifically, the messages it gives when something happens to Docker containers could be more informative. For example, it might simply state that container states have changed, or it might mention the directory paths where container data is saved, but these messages don't provide enough detail. To access the files, users currently need to navigate through a complex directory structure, which isn't very user-friendly. There is a need for more informative release notes. The current ones lack detail about what's included in the updates and what fixes have been implemented. This makes it difficult for users to understand the changes and how they might affect the experience.

Radware's management is very proactive, but Radware's lower-level staff is not proactive. You need to do a lot of follow-ups. This is one point that they need to improve. If they improve this, they will be world-class because everything else is so good.

As a service provider, we are expecting the multi-tenancy feature on the dashboard and reporting side. It will help share reports with customers in real-time. They can directly see them online. We are working with their team on API integration with our portal. We will be able to achieve that, but it will take some time.

Its documentation is not 100% clear, making it the weakest aspect of Radware. We have encountered some difficulties in understanding how to configure it correctly.

Radware DefenseFlow should add new features and algorithms to make it efficient.