SecureSphere WAF Management for AWS (On-Demand)

The solution functions just like a firewall, but it operates in the cloud. It is designed to protect web applications and environments hosted on the cloud. 

It helps protect applications from DDoS attacks and other types of attacks. I handle a wide range of business requirements with it.

The solution can be configured in just a couple of minutes. It ensures 99.7% availability for my applications. It provides an additional layer of security for web applications and other applications, including mobile applications. It protects my environment and helps maintain my reputation in the market.

It is not a personal firewall, however, I can log my traffic to the Web Application Firewall  if my hardware is available on-premise. I am satisfied with all the features available. There is nothing specific where the application firewall is falling short.

I have been working with Imperva solutions personally since last month.

I would rate the solution ten out of ten in terms of stability.

The solution is highly scalable. I can configure this firewall to expand based on my needs and revert to my basic configuration when traffic is over.

Technical support is divided into two categories: partner side and OEM side. It is easy to contact them, and my queries are resolved efficiently.

Positive

The initial setup is very easy. I just need to route the traffic, similar to configuring an IP on the application firewall. It typically takes no more than a day and is easy, rated at nine out of ten.

The pricing is competitive in the market. The solution helps improve my security posture and operational costs.

There are other solutions available in the market, however, Imperva Web Application Firewall  is a good solution.

I would recommend Imperva Web Application Firewall  to others. 

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten as it is a good solution. However, there are other solutions in the market.

We are a premier partner with Imperva. We usually recommend Imperva Web Application Firewall  (WAF ) more because our customers sometimes get a better deal, and many already have Imperva solutions on-premises. We help them move to the cloud and other related tasks.

Customers enjoy the rules implemented in Imperva WAF , which are updated automatically any time a new breach is discovered. This eliminates the need for backend changes or manual updates, making the system straightforward.

The valuable features of Imperva WAF include its effective security breach prevention through automatically updating rules. The support team answers cases quickly as well.

The product's customization capabilities are a bit problematic, requiring support cases for backend modifications. 

Additionally, the handling of high-traffic volumes could be better, as it doesn't cut you off if you exceed your purchased traffic. Our clients like the guarantee that they won't be charged for exceeding traffic during peak periods. Users also need to be more attentive to false alerts, as the marketing might give a false sense of trust.

I have been dealing with Imperva for three years, while my company has been involved for more years.

Imperva WAF does not appear to handle high traffic volumes optimally during peaks as it only notifies clients if they exceed their purchased amount of traffic. However, it does not immediately cause any issue unless the excess persists over time.

Their technical support is rated nine out of ten. Support cases are answered quickly.

Positive

The setup is straightforward. Clients often manage it themselves, and no action is required on their end for implementation.

On occasion, we help our clients get on the cloud as part of our partnership with Imperva.

The pricing tends to be expensive. As premier partners, we get good deals, however, without such deals, it is usually quite costly. The cost also varies based on the plan that clients choose.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is recommended for companies needing a robust cloud-based solution. For on-premises versions, it might be considered outdated.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use the service for protection due to the fact that it has profile functionality.

Protection is the best solution since it has profile functionality.

Interesting alternatives are Akamai and some cloud solutions do exist.

We use Imperva for our web applications that we have hosted to protect them.

With our deployment setup, the benefit is regarding the security and how threats have been blocked. It's not studied in terms of resources or speed. The threat prevention is the aspect we are monitoring.

Empower administration is user-friendly, and we do not need much for managing day-to-day operations. It is easy to use and has good security. Also, it is very customizable, especially for controlling web browsers and devices.

I would prefer AI integrations for user administration, visualization, log analytics, and risk analysis. If they can bring i n generative AI features, that would be useful.

I am working with Imperva at the moment and have been using it for maybe six to seven years.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues.

Scalability is not a problem since we have enough resources as it's an on-premises version.

We have escalated to tech support and it's quite good. I would rate them a seven point five out of ten.

We didn't use any WAF  product before Imperva.

The initial deployment was seamless, and there weren't many complexities.

The deployment was done by a separate company within the company.

I do not have much understanding about F5 yet as I am currently evaluating their solution.

I suggest looking for a cloud-based solution rather than on-premises, which might improve availability, stability, and security.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We are primarily a customer for Firewall. We're also moving into the managed security space, but we are primarily a customer here. 

So, it is primarily used for web application firewalls. Protecting web applications against application-layer attacks. There is advanced bot protection and DDoS Protection. 

It's very simple to implement. It works right out of the box once you integrate the application. It does the learning for you and starts applying relevant signatures. 

It's effective in protecting against different kinds of attacks. For example, it can mitigate DDoS attacks and block application layer attacks like SQL injection, HTTP, and cross-site scripting attacks. The latency is pretty low.

Support is one thing I wish Imperva could improve. They follow the phone model and keep rotating you from one customer service person to another. The layer one support isn't very clear about the workings of the product.

My feedback is primarily about Imperva Cloud, not on-premise. On-premise is a whole new story.

Support is the issue for Imperva Cloud. It's also a bit pricey. It's a premium service and very expensive. The licensing model is not very straightforward. Every feature is priced separately, and to enjoy maximum protection, you'll have to spend a lot of money. The licensing model is a bit complex, and each feature is very pricey. For example, API security and web application protection are two separate license packages.

For WAF, I have been using it for about four years now. 

The solution is generally stable, but there are sometimes where a link degradation does not involve a failover to another port where you're able to enjoy the service. So your availability is affected because of link degradation. It will not automatically take you to another port. But otherwise, it's generally stable.

The capacity and everything is managed by Imperva. We don't really get to know much about the back end.

It does a good job because we have very busy applications that seem to work well without any issues. The only issue that we experienced recently is that if there's an issue on the uplinks, the traffic does not automatically fail over to another region or another POP. You're still directed to a POP where there's degradation in service. So, if you're affected, you'll have to bear the pain until the issue is resolved before you're able to access the services again. So, there's no automatic failover between POPs from one POP to another in the event of a link degradation along the path.

Neutral

We have tried out Radware as a POC just a couple of months ago. There is also Cloudflare .

I'd prefer Cloudflare because of its presence on the Internet, the number of services it offers, and the level of automation that it gives you. 

I'd look up to Cloudflare because it's more stable. Because of its points of presence everywhere in the world, you're in a better place to enjoy better availability than being on Imperva. 

And the level of protection from my test, I think it's pretty good. It's next-generation application firewall. So it's something that I look up to.

The deployment was easy. We have quite a number of sites, more than 300. Per site, it can take about ten minutes to integrate, to move your application to the cloud, before you can achieve maximum protection or before you can achieve protection on your site. So, it's a very seamless process.

We had challenges integrating with our on-premise tools, our SIEM tools and SOAR tools. Integration is a bit complex. There's no capability to integrate with our on-premise tools, or if there is, it's very limited.

It's a SaaS service, so everything's maintained by Imperva. It's something that is managed by Imperva. 

So, there is a return on investment in terms of achieving protection for our public-facing portals. We have seen quite a number of DDoS attacks being mitigated by Imperva. We have also seen a few web application attacks that have been blocked.

In terms of time savings, we don't have to go to the data center to do upgrades and other mundane things, so we can focus on more important things. 

The licensing model is a bit complex and very complicated model. 

We operate a hybrid cloud and on-premise as well, and we're looking for a solution that would suit all of our needs. Right now, for API security, we don't have anything. But for others, for WAF, we do have something. We use Imperva as our WAF, for example.

We carry out research, which is the first step when we're looking to source a product. We do market research, obviously, and an assessment. So it starts with reviewing PeerSpot or what people say about different products, and then we call vendors in. They give us a demo. They give us a POC. Then, we draft the required set of requirements, and then we eventually pick a product based on what we need.

AI functionality in Imperva does do quite a bit of learning, but Imperva can do more. There's little interaction. There's basically just the machine learning bit. So it basically baselines the application and then analyzes traffic towards the application. But in terms of capability to interact with large language models, that is still not at the level where the competitors are.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.