Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs. F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)

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

So a lot of companies that have a digital side and they have a lot of applications in the cloud, this is one of those areas that it can protect the net so it can lock 'em down, it'll build a baseline so you understand what that application's doing. So if it sees something not normal, it'll get protected against that.

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

• Layer seven attacks are becoming far more common. Traditionally it was always layered three, layer four, where you get an additional firewall, but with the application layer attacks become more frequent, more popular, et cetera. So having the web application firewall protecting us, and then with the recent Log4j, that's the most recent use case when it gave us that instant level of protection whilst we remediated the Log4j that we had that and the F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was protecting us.
• I have a great relationship with the account manager, my account manager, and I think he drives the best price possible, um, for me, and I'm happy with that price.
• F5 Distributed Cloud WAF is always innovating and evolving.
• We run a very competitive proof value where we run numerous competitors against each other, and then we evaluate from that and then make the selection, and F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was the winner.

Incentivized

• User interface
• Slow response

Incentivized

• So we just had some performance issues when it comes to routing. Because the web application firewall sits in front of our website, which is hosted on-site, we had some trouble with the VGP protocols between the two sites and it took us a while to figure it out. So that is probably one area where we could improve. Otherwise, when it comes to the WAF functionality itself, it's really good.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Basically, Cloudflare is a more economical solution at the level of DNS balancing, easy to use with a few simple clicks and that has gained an advantage in the market, however, compared to F5, it falls short of the entire protection panorama that the solution provides since F5 does not It's just DNS that goes further and that's where it differentiates and stands out.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• Accelerated time to value as it was a requirement for a workload being provisioned on that cloud
• As an existing f5 customer, access to their solutions integrator (GridZero) made the sizing, licensing, purchases, and downloading of the software very quick and painless

Incentivized