Imperva Application Security Platform Reviews

I am the administrator of the Web Application Firewall. I manage all the web applications and security regarding it. Some of the main use cases are related to OWASP Top 10 and bot attacks.

We are a distributor of all types of cybersecurity products. We handle more than 170 OEMs, and Imperva Web Application Firewall is one of them.

We were facing issues related to web servers and OWASP Top 10. We had bots rather than human traffic. We went with Imperva for a single-stack solution. We have bot protection, DDoS protection, web application firewall, and database security from Imperva.

It is one of the best solutions that I have worked with. After deploying it, bot attacks have completely stopped. When it comes to OWASP Top 10, it responds very clearly when we do testing, so we are not facing any threats. Compliance is also very good. So, overall, it is very good for security and compliance.

Imperva is known in the market for customization and deployments according to the use cases of the customers. You can deploy it the way you want. You can deploy it in the inline mode, reverse proxy mode, or transfer and bridge mode. You can deploy it according to the environment or infra of the company. In terms of integration, with one click of a button, you can integrate it with your SIEM solution. You have preconfigured SIEM codes. You just need to run that code in the SIEM application, and that is it. You will start getting the logs. It is pretty easy.

For certain web servers, I have it on-prem, and for certain web servers, I have it on the cloud. A basic use case of the customers is that they want a single dashboard for the cloud WAF or on-prem WAF. There is a solution called attack analytics in Imperva. It integrates with on-prem and the cloud, so in a single dashboard, you can see what is happening in your on-prem as well as cloud setup. It is very easy. When it comes to reporting, you can take reports anywhere anytime and you can take logs anywhere anytime. Someone who does not know about cybersecurity can understand the logs. Logs are in English instead of the raw format. Anybody who knows English can understand them. Reporting is very easy. These reports can also be used for audit and compliance.

We use SIEM solutions. We use Splunk, and we use Elastic. We use Datadog and Securonix. I integrated Imperva with Elastic and Splunk. We have a pre-written code. We just have to download that code and run the code in the SIEM solution server. After that, the logs start showing. It is that easy. Integration is that easy. I have also done integration with multifactor authentication, security key, HSM, etc. I have worked with RSA and YubiKey. Both of them were very easy. The integration happened with the click of a button. The integration is seamless and is working perfectly. Our clients are happy. We are happy.

There are many features. There is ease of deployment. You can deploy the Imperva Web Application Firewall in two to three minutes. After that, you have to set the policies. For setting policies, you have toggle buttons. You can turn something on or off.

Writing rules is very easy. There is a toggle button. You do not have to write the parsers and rules. You do not have to be well-versed in it. Anybody who works with the Imperva console for a month can master the solution.

The only disadvantage of Imperva is that it is a pretty costly solution. 

It has been around one year.

It is completely stable. For stability, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

It scales very well. I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability.

In terms of traffic volumes, being a distributor, we do not face the issue of many customers flooding our website. It is not like an e-commerce company. At peak hours, there is almost 500 Mbps of network traffic. That is it.

I would rate their support a ten out of ten. Even if I call at 2 AM, they pick up, and they answer. 

I have experience with Akamai and Cloudflare. Cloudflare is not made for enterprises or big companies. It is only for small and medium organizations. This is where Imperva comes into the picture. 

Akamai and Imperva are pretty much similar. The only thing that makes them different is the SLA. Imperva is the only vendor that gives three-second SLAs for DDoS attacks. Imperva can mitigate any DDoS attack in just three seconds. This is the main thing that differentiates Imperva from Akamai. Another thing is that the deployment of Akamai is very complex. You need around two to three days to deploy it. You require senior-level engineers. It is very hard to understand as compared to Imperva.

If you go with the Cloud Web Application Firewall, you can complete deployment in a maximum of half an hour. On-prem deployment is a bit complex. It takes three to four hours.

There are only two people who work with Imperva. We handle many solutions, and we have two people handling Imperva. We manage everything in Imperva only with two engineers. The company does not need to hire many people.

It is very costly, but the return on investment is very high. Its cost was around $70,000, and we got it back in just six months. 

It is very expensive. A basic license costs around $10,000. This is the only disadvantage of the solution. Everything else is pretty good.

When a client comes to us saying that they want to implement Imperva, the first thing that we ask them is if they are willing to spend that much. If they say yes, then we do not even compare it to any other product. We just go for Imperva. Feature-wise, we are confident of it. Any customer would go for it in terms of features.

Overall, I would rate Imperva Web Application Firewall a nine out of ten.

We have details on the protection available in two key ways. We primarily see the use of WAF, specifically the CloudWAF, which is always active for application security. This ensures that everyone attempting to update the customer environment must go through the CloudWAF.

We often see customers opting for the on-demand option for DDoS protection as it’s more cost-effective. When a DDoS attack is detected, traffic is redirected through Imperva’s servers to be cleaned before being sent to the client. This on-demand option is particularly popular in my region. However, customers with the budget can choose Orizon, where traffic is continuously routed through Imperva’s scrubbing centers, which are among the largest in the world. 

For Linux protection, the most important feature is layer seven DDoS protection, which focuses on application-level threats. Imperva does offer layer three DDoS protection, but that's less common in my region. 

It is expanding its number of data centers for scrubbing traffic. Currently, there is only one POP for cleaning in South Africa. They might add another POP in North Africa, possibly in Nigeria or Egypt. Latency concerns customers, especially in regions like East and West Africa, where traffic has to travel to South Africa before returning. Increasing the number of POPs across the continent would help address these latency issues and improve overall service.

While the platform is already quite strong, there’s always room for improvement, especially in keeping up with emerging trends and new types of attacks. Enhancing security capabilities could be beneficial. Integrating more advanced AI features could significantly improve its effectiveness and help customers leverage these tools more effectively. It would be great to see more focus on AI integration to handle and analyze data more efficiently.

I rate the solution's stability a nine-point five out of ten.

Scalability is quite good. Imperva has an extensive global network with over fifty data centers, which supports their cloud platform's load balancing. As you increase the number of web servers, you can adjust your license to accommodate more throughput. Licensing is based on throughput, so as your needs grow, you can quickly expand your coverage accordingly.

Support is solid because it's a managed service. Everything runs smoothly, and I haven't encountered any issues with it.

It’s also available as a managed service, meaning local IT teams need less involvement. Through the managed services, most management is handled on the server side. This approach is effective and reduces the total cost of ownership by requiring fewer resources to handle attacks and related events.

Generally, it provides better security and offers more relief for security teams managing their applications. It simplifies things for architects, as layer seven protection is more reliable than traditional next-generation solutions, which may not cover this level of detail. With Imperva’s managed service, there's no need to worry about the payload size or complex settings, as the service handles these aspects effectively. 

The cloud platform excels in interface design, reporting, and support. It offers both executive and technical reports that are highly usable.

Overall, I rate the solution as ten out of ten.

My use case involved handling specific web applications for our operations team.

Imperva DDoS helps us automate production. The client had specific requirements for a cloud project in the financial sector.

We faced issues regarding compliance with client procedures. The client had strict compliance rules, and Imperva needed to be on a VM, while the client required containerization, causing a conflict. They went with Imperva for the on-premise version but shelved the cloud project due to too many blockers.

I have been using Imperva DDos for six months.

We tried to contact Imperva's technical support but encountered much resistance. I went through the front portal team on their website, but they wanted to know my client's name, which I couldn't disclose due to an NDA. They directed me to a sales guy who was only interested in selling and wasn't helpful.

Negative

We faced challenges integrating Imperva DDoS. The biggest issue was the lack of a Terraform provider for the on-premise version, which was only for the cloud version. We used an API porting server as a stopgap, but I advised the client to discuss with Imperva about releasing a proper Terraform provider. We worked with Imperva DDoS for six months, but it was never fully deployed due to the organization's internal politics and compliance requirements.

Imperva DDoS is a web application firewall that protects against and mitigates threats. We aimed to shorten deployment times and deploy it in a scalable way using DevOps.

However, we faced challenges because Imperva only had a Terraform provider for the cloud version.

I would rate the tool itself a five out of ten.

We use Imperva DDoS to stop DDoS attacks and reduce the amount of unwanted queries against web services or web scraping.

The solution should integrate with something that looks at continuous security management.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a nine out of ten.

The solution's full deployment took three days, and that was because the clients were unsure which public-facing services needed to be added on. Internally, the solution's deployment took around two hours.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten.

Imperva DDoS has helped maintain website availability during an attack because we didn't even know there was an attack. Imperva DDoS was integrated into our existing security measures by using the easy configuration, which was making use of cloud platforms. All the SOC and SIEM integrations and notifications to instant response teams were easily integrated by email.

The solution's real-time threat detection works well and lets me know if something is happening on the management interface, where I spend most of my time.

The solution's scalability supported our client company's growing traffic needs. It started with a medium-sized web presence of 7,00,000 queries per second globally and has moved into tens of millions of queries per second. They are really benefiting from having to keep on spinning up additional security services rather than spinning up operational services.

The solution's reporting and analytics features have helped in understanding attack patterns. The solution helps in understanding who is targeting companies and from where. The solution also helps understand the types of attacks.

Some attacks are investigations where people search to see what is available. On other occasions, people try to write specific scripts to attack the front end to see if they can gain access to the back end. With the solution's reports, you can learn about the attacks and improve security where it's needed.

My experience in setting up and configuring Imperva DDoS for our client's environment was very good. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate Imperva DDoS a nine out of ten.

We mostly use it for protecting web applications from online threats like DDoS attacks.

The most valuable feature of Imperva, in addition to its strong knowledge base, is its effective protection for web applications. This is crucial because it shields web applications from attacks. Another notable feature is its use of artificial intelligence for better security. Additionally, Imperva offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection, which are beneficial for overall security. However, the standout feature remains its knowledge base, as, without adequate attack signature knowledge, security can be compromised.

One potential improvement for Imperva is enhancing its alert system. While the core functionality isn't a problem, there is room for improvement in terms of the alerts' depth and comprehensiveness. Specifically, having more detailed and informative alerts could be beneficial, especially for mobile users and individuals. This would enable better visibility into security issues and facilitate more effective troubleshooting, ensuring that critical information doesn't get overlooked. Additionally, Imperva could see improvement in its integrations with other solutions. Integrations, such as those with QRadar, can sometimes be a bit challenging, falling between not being extremely difficult but also not very easy. Simplifying and enhancing these integration processes could be valuable.

I have been using Imperva Web Application Firewall for three years.

It is a stable solution.

When it comes to scalability, Imperva Web Application Firewall could use some improvement. I would rate the scalability as a seven out of ten. Three people use the solution at our company.

The technical support from Imperva is generally good. While we haven't encountered major issues with Imperva, I have found their support to be reliable and helpful. There haven't been significant problems, and the support seems to meet your needs effectively. I would rate the support as a nine out of ten.

Positive

Installation of the new version of Imperva in my organization was straightforward. I worked with an Imperva specialist, and it went smoothly and it only took a day. Maintaining Imperva is a standard process and not difficult. It is a typical level of effort for software maintenance. We have a team of three people at our company who maintain it.

My advice for people considering using Imperva is that it is crucial to first define what you need from a security solution. Once their requirements are clear, you should thoroughly evaluate Imperva and its features to ensure it aligns with their needs. Based on my experience, I highly recommend Imperva and would confidently endorse this solution to others. Overall, I would rate Imperva Web Application Firewall as a nine out of ten.

I prefer not to do a review for EDR since it is a new product that I am using. Instead, I would like to review other products I have worked with before, such as Imperva products, Imperva Web Application Firewall, or Imperva DAM.

I worked as a consultant for the customer and was part of a design and deployment team for Imperva API Security.

Could you please describe the deployment process, initial setup process, and what challenges were faced?

I would need to check with my manager and run this by the legal team in the US before I would be able to share this information.

Please repeat the question.

That would be fine.

The technical support team would be rated 5 out of 10, where 10 represents the best support and 1 represents very poor support.

Positive

I would prefer to receive the form via email so I can fill it out manually myself. Additionally, I want this review to be anonymous, with neither my name nor my company's name appearing anywhere.

We can schedule a call in two hours to discuss this further.

Please describe the deployment process, initial setup process, and what challenges were faced.

I would need to check with my manager and run this by the legal team in the US before sharing more information. We can schedule a call in two hours to discuss this further.

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.

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 in 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.

I handled web application and database monitoring, including some DDoS work. I implemented Imperva for a top-five bank in Indonesia, monitoring their service and database activity.

Firstly, Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like signatures to identify attacks like cross-site scripting or SQL injection.

It's important to note, if you don't have dynamic profiling, you can use manual configurations. For instance, you can configure a text field on a website to limit input to only numeric characters and specific special characters. 

This helps protect against SQL injection, as these attacks often use special characters to try and break the website's security.

Imperva Cloud WAF would be the most powerful option. It uses cloud-based signatures, which are constantly updated. This is different from the on-premises version, where the signature updates might be less frequent.

Imperva has basic reporting templates. We can use those, and we can also create custom reports. However, customization is limited to labels and structure – we can't change the actual content of the reports. For that, we need to use Imperva Compass.

Overall, I would rate the user experience an eight out of ten, with ten being good experience. 

The signature updates could be faster. Sometimes we have to upload signatures to the Imperva portal for checking and analysis before we can use them.

I have some experience, but not with its on-premise solution. We used their cloud-based WAF, likely Incapsula.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

Sometimes the customer service and support response time is long. And sometimes, it is fast. 

Positive

The initial setup for Imperva isn't too difficult. We start with a script, setting up the IP, network, and gateway. Then, we inject the license and test on-site for monitoring our web application. 

If we're using dynamic profiling, we configure that, ensuring it works properly. After about one or two weeks, we begin fine-tuning and limiting form types.

The price is high compared to other solutions like FortiWeb.

I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with one being cheap and ten being expensive. 

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

At my previous workplace in the banking sector, we used Imperva WAF for the monitoring of our internet banking traffic, and we also used Imperva's DAM for the database activity monitoring.

Our deployment of Imperva WAF was situated on-premises and it was in use throughout the whole organization, which included around 3,500 clients.

Imperva Web Application Firewall has improved security of my organization through enhanced visiblity as well protecting malicious IPs, applications and unknown users as well.

The WAF itself has been very valuable to me because it has such a complete range of features. Another reason why I like it is because it also takes care of the total overview of the traffic over the network.

Imperva's product is very good, but when it comes to procuring the software in my country it can be somewhat expensive. I don't recall the exact amount, but in comparison with other countries it is a huge investment.

They recently separated the WAF and the DAM management gateways in order for each of these to be managed from different areas, so I believe it now requires additional investments for what was previously a single complete solution.

Although the vendor support from Imperva is not bad, getting a response from them can be a lengthy process at times.

I have used Imperva WAF for about three years. 

The stability is mature enough, in my experience. In fact, I would give it a 5/5 for stability.

Scalability-wise, there is one issue we encountered that I want to mention. At some point, Imperva, moved their account takeover prevention features from the on-premises edition to the cloud-based edition, and we discovered that this step would take yet another integration, seeing that we were using Imperva on-premises. These account takeover prevention features, however, were already part of our subscription, but since the features moved to the cloud, we missed out on them. So, in this sense, I would say the scalability strategy isn't as solid as it should be, and for this reason I would rate the scalability a 3.5/5.

On the other hand, when it comes to how many users we were able to scale up to, we actually had the whole organization using it, including around 3,500 clients in total.

The support from the vendor side could be improved because their response times weren't great and the process of obtaining the proper support was a long process sometimes. That said, the support itself was not bad.

Positive

The setup was actually quite an advanced process. It was a good experience, but all in all it took about one year to get everything fully set up, when you take all the fine-tuning activities and such into account.

We deployed the Imperva WAF with the help of organizations in South Africa who acted as consultants and implementation partners for Imperva. Our experience with them was good, and the full implementation required two professionals from the consultant's side and about five people from our own organization. The vendor itself was not part of the implementation process.

The pricing is somewhat expensive. It is actually a huge investment when compared to other countries.

Not only that, but Imperva went on to separate the WAF and DAM management gateways, making it so that each would have to be managed and licensed separately, incurring the cost of additional investments.

On a related note, there was another licensing issue we encountered where we had a subscription for account takeover prevention features, but these features had been moved by Imperva from the on-premises instance to the cloud. Since we had not moved to the cloud at that point, we did not have access to these features anymore.

I can highly recommend Imperva WAF for financial institutions. It's a good solution and I think it's important for financial institutions, particularly those who conduct online banking, to make use of a solid WAF such as this.

I would rate Imperva WAF a nine out of ten.