Akamai App & API Protector vs. Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service

Akamai Kona Site Defender KSD, works fine for any website or mobile application (Native/JDK), it can be used as a WAF, a rate limiting tool, or a bot management tool all in one, plus you will get all the benefits of the Akamai CDN (Content distribution network) as well

Incentivized

Simple Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service were out of the box standard policies can be applied. this Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is perfect for a basic environment and protection in particular if you have already other barracuda Infrastruture elements in your network. Easy to deploy configure and get it running with in a few hours. Definitely not the type of WAF for a complex web application.

Incentivized

• Web Security
• Bot managment
• Rate Control

Incentivized

• Provides full-spectrum security DOD-level protection; which is a big help for us for security of our data.
• Ease of setup on her firewall for security for VPN users.
• Configuration is easy to do and use for our security team with its features and pictures of instruction.

Incentivized

• Custom rules might be hard to configure
• For some cases you will need to contact the Akamai team to adjust the backend
• Interface might feel laggy if used in a non-powerful PC

Incentivized

• User interface
• Slow response

Incentivized

Using the phishing and impersonation tool to rule out and capture phishing emails is good one we are using.

Incentivized

• Fair Security investment
• An attack impact would be higher
• Support contract is not cheap

Incentivized

• Positive - quick deployment
• Positive - scalable for simple environments
• Negative - difficult to support complex web app environments

Incentivized