F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF vs. Salt Security API Protection Platform

I believe that in industrial environments like ours where we have to have bare metal devices near the production environment combined with hybrid cloud, that is a good platform. That's a good use case. It optimizes traffic. It helps us stay more secure in our data centers. Now with regards to that are fully operating in the cloud, I'm not really sure if we would make the same decision considering the option that I said to have something that is self-provision to avoid too much management of virtual machines on the cloud. So that's an area of improvement.

Incentivized

Salt is highly recommended for anyone who wants to discover, monitor and protect their APIs against various types of attacks. Salt should not be used as a SIEM.

• So the product definitely is helping us for sudden attacks through DDOS, some injection ingestion into UI URLs, and definitely it's capturing those and I definitely see that as an advantage for us. They can stop the hackers from using our endpoints.

Incentivized

• PII identification in API traffic.
• Divergence between API traffic and documentation (swagger files).
• Potential attacks with information to take counter measures.

• The UI for events. E.g., clicking the "Accept" button does nothing.
• Traffic learning suggestions are often very incorrect. We were originally suggested to use "Automatic" learning, and had to completely scrap the policy due to the suggestions.
• "All in one" dashboard for viewing application URL/parameter overrides per policy.

Incentivized

• The platform could have more options for exporting detailed data from attackers' dashboards.
• The Attackers dashboard could also have more options of filters in order to support the investigations of the attack.
• The OAS analysis could present a more detailed view of the found issues.

We just love work with f5

Incentivized

Most* of it is very intuitive and easy to use. The "Help" section is fairly fantastic. See some of my other comments about things like the "Traffic Learning" section being wildly wrong sometimes, and also the event logs with UI buttons that don't do anything. Overall though, it's an excellent product.

Incentivized

Highly knowledgeable engineers who understand complex networking and application-delivery issues.


Strong escalation paths — once a case reaches senior engineers, resolutions are fast and accurate.


Comprehensive documentation and many self-service resources for troubleshooting.


Clear communication with well-structured updates throughout the ticket lifecycle.


Excellent for critical incidents, with reliable guidance during high-severity outages.


Deep product expertise across BIG-IP, ASM/Advanced WAF, GTM/DNS, and modern F5 services.

Incentivized

-Stable data path equals to less crashes -Almost all the features working as expected -Provides more granular controls in allowing false positives -Request evaluation is accurate -Irules feature is a plus

Incentivized

We tried controls offered by the IaaS providers but these were hard to manage and did not provide the visibility we wanted. We also protected APIs with a normal WAF but this was only helpful for assets we knew about and API attacks were not caught by the WAF.

• In our case it has been great because the pricing is just right for all the features that we have on the platform and the flexibility. In fact, we acquired another license last year, so that's something that we're interested in. We are currently moving towards the cloud with our ERP systems and eliminating the IBM platform, so we would like to see that F5 virtual option available on Azure.

Incentivized

• Salt Security API Protection Platform has provided detailed information that is helping us to identify and investigate attacks in our environment