No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS WAF vs Airlock comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Airlock
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
40th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Airlock is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AWS WAF is 4.0%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS WAF4.0%
Airlock0.8%
Other95.2%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Tiodor Jovovic - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Business Officer at Sky Express
Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world
WAF is the most beneficial feature for security posture. Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product. The level of detail of the configuration is the most significant aspect. We can adapt it to every single application that exists in the world. The product helps with the compliance processes.
reviewer2849304 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Cloud Security at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Centralized web firewalling has reduced our attack surface and protects multi‑cloud applications
AWS WAF can be improved by not being too sensitive for some data because with some XML, it is sometimes very sensitive. When we upload videos or photos, it is flagged as a malicious pattern, and sometimes it is not sensitive enough because some query patterns that have the capability to perform malicious actions still result in false positives from AWS. It would be better for AWS WAF if it not only had logs but also specific payloads or something that directly included the specific logs so we can have more detail in our analysis. I think it should be better if they improve their capabilities in reducing the attack surface and also have better visibility for OWASP top 10 web applications and the API. Regarding AWS WAF's AI capabilities, its governance and security are very good because our attack surface is mostly reduced. The new dashboard is a bit complicated; it is easier for non-technical users, but for technical professionals, it is sometimes confusing. While the security itself is good and the governance is good, I think it needs to improve the UI or the flow itself. The accuracy and reliability of AWS WAF's output is better than others. With the free version, it has a good filter with the attack surface and the reliability is good, but sometimes we need to adjust. With the free version, we also have to pay some amount of money if the number exceeds the default provided by AWS.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to limit access based on geographical location by restricting specific IP addresses."
"The most valuable feature is that it is very easy to configure. It just takes a couple of minutes."
"The automation of blocking for security attacks is valuable, with AWS applying rate limiting."
"The biggest benefit of AWS WAF for us is to filter malicious requests, so we can protect our environment and application from malicious actors."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the way it blocks threats to external applications."
 

Cons

"The tool must be simplified."
"AWS WAF can be improved by not being too sensitive for some data because with some XML, it is sometimes very sensitive."
"Alternative WAFs have something like bot mitigation or bot control within the WAF, but you don't have such things in AWS WAF."
"We have issues with reporting, troubleshooting, and analytics. AWS WAF needs to bring costs down."
"It's a bit difficult to apply the right rules for the right security."
"For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad bots"
"We should be able to do proper whitelisting."
"The main difference with other similar products is the security efficiency against the type of attacks because normally Amazon works with certain types of attacks and is unable to deal with most of the more sophisticated new attacks that are now the market."
"Support wise, I don't think they are that good compared to individual vendors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is cheap."
"Its price is fair. There is a very fair amount that they charge. It has a pay-as-you-go model, so it pretty much depends on how much a user uses it. As per the cloud norms, the more you use, the more you pay. I would rate it a five out of ten in terms of pricing."
"There are different scale options available for WAF."
"The product is moderately priced."
"The solution's cost depends on the use cases."
"It's cheap."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"AWS WAF costs $5 monthly plus $1 for the rule. It's cheap, cost-wise. It's worth the money."
"It has a variable pricing scheme."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
11%
Government
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise28
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS WAF?
AWS WAF is affordable; it depends on the number of rules you apply. The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
 

Also Known As

Airlock Suite
AWS Web Application Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Raiffeisen, SGKB, Generali, Visana
eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva, Radware, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.