Imperva Application Security Platform Reviews

We are using Imperva Web Application Firewall to monitor databases.

The most valuable features of Imperva Web Application Firewall are the monitoring of databases and the dashboards are easy to understand.

Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better.

I have been using Imperva Web Application Firewall for approximately three months.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable.

The scalability of the Imperva Web Application Firewall is good.

The initial setup of the Imperva Web Application Firewall is complex.

I rate the initial setup of Imperva Web Application Firewall a four out of five.

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

The solution is used to detect and block application attacks on the internet perimeter. We integrate the solution with SOAR and Phantom to automate our playbook and block URLs.

The solution reduces the risk of attacks and that benefits our clients. 

The solution integrates seamlessly with other tools and has a good alert mechanism. 

The solution provides good protection against OWASP top-ten attacks.

The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones. 

The solution's pricing could be improved. 

I have been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

We implemented the SA solution and have not tried to scale it beyond our client's 10,000 users. 

I do not have experience with escalating issues because our internal support team handles vendor support. 

We have not switched solutions but prefer this solution for on-premises. When we need a tool that is cloud-based, we prefer other solutions. 

The initial setup was not complex and integration was easy. 

The solution was implemented by the supplier. 

The solution's pricing is an issue. 

We use many tools for the application layer including Imperva, Infoblox Secure DNS, and Palo Alto. 

The solution is a leader in the market and is easy to use.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code.

An improvement for Imperva WAF would be to reduce the number of false positives and create more strong use cases based on AI/ML or behavioral analytics. In the next release, Imperva WAF should include more use cases for Advanced Persistent Threats and next emission sophisticated attacks.

I've been working with Imperva WAF for six to seven months.

Imperva WAF is scalable.

Imperva's technical support is very good.

I'd recommend Imperva WAF as a good product in terms of occupation perspective and strong WAF. I'd rate it as seven out of ten.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is used for customers who are looking to secure their multiple applications and want to block the threats, such as DDoS and ransomware attacks. Imperva Web Application Firewall delivers three main things, data security, data availability, and access control. For data security, it prevents malware and malicious threats. For the data availability, by preventing threats, such as malware, data can be available each and every time. You are able to have Access control, you have the ability to control the access.

The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are DDoS, malware, and the other malicious threat prevention it provides. Additionally, third-party integration is available. You can forward the log for further analysis.

Imperva Web Application Firewall can improve by providing better features, such as improved prevention of zero-day attacks. Additionally, it should include a VR meta-analysis.

I have been using the Imperva Web Application Firewall for approximately 15 years.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable, and the performance is good.

The solution is best suited for enterprise-sized businesses. It is a scalable solution.

The Technical support is good from Imperva Web Application Firewall.

I have used another solution previously which was good. However, Imperva Web Application Firewall had more features.

The deployment of the Imperva Web Application Firewall is simple. However, it is not very user-friendly. It would be a benefit because the customers would have a better time with the installation.

I did the implementation Imperva Web Application Firewall myself and it took approximately three days.

Imperva Web Application Firewall price is higher compared to other solutions. However, everything is included in the price.

I do the maintenance and upgrades of the solution if it requires it. I would recommend this solution to everyone. 

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

We use it for protection. For example, for one of our banking clients, we use it to protect their mobile and website applications.

Imperva is really amazing, feature wise and performance wise.

Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay.

The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution.

We have been a partner for Imperva Incapsula for two years.

It's stable.

It's a scalable solution.

Technical support is provided by a distributor, and sometimes, there's a delay.

I would rate the technical support at four on a scale from one to ten.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy because it's a plugin; it's an appliance. That means that there is a predefined setting.

Even with the professional service, it does not take a long time. It takes a few days, and everything is done.

For the professional service, usually one person from the distributor is required for deployment.

We have an issue with Imperva Incapsula in the Iraqi market because of the high price.

If you are looking for efficiency and the best technology, you should use Imperva. If you have a limited budget, however, then this is not a suitable solution for you.

I would rate Imperva Incapsula at eight on a scale from one to ten.

The mitigation feature is what I find most valuable in Imperva Web Application Firewall. The interface of the cloud version of this solution is also good.

Every product has a room for improvement, and in Imperva Web Application Firewall, we found a limitation when we need to check which email IP traffic is coming from, e.g. we cannot find it.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is a good system, but we found that the visibility of the diverse-path server, e.g. where the traffic is coming from, the different IPs, etc., needs improvement. If we can populate those information, we can block them in our firewalls, and that would make this solution better.

Though the cloud interface of Imperva Web Application Firewall is good, the interface of the on-premises version is not as appealing, and it's what I'd like to see improved in the next release of this solution.

Imperva Web Application Firewall is a very stable solution.

The cloud version of Imperva Web Application Firewall is very scalable.

Technical support for this solution is good.

It's very easy to set up the cloud version of Imperva Web Application Firewall. It's not difficult, because you just need to map your DNS, and that's it. Setting up this solution is not a problem.

I'm working as a cyber security consultant and I provide Imperva Web Application Firewall and other similar solutions to customers.

We are working in the Middle East, e.g. we are deploying solutions to different organizations.

I don't have any input on the pricing for Imperva Web Application Firewall, as that part is covered by the research team.

I don't have advice for people looking into implementing this solution, except that everyone has different opinions and different requirements. Every organization has different requirements, and their choices will be based on their requirements. If all their requirements are fulfilled by Imperva Web Application Firewall, then they'll want to implement or use it.

I've giving Imperva Web Application Firewall a score of seven out of ten.

We are an implementer for clients within the financial services looking to protect their internet, mobile devices, etc.

There are a number of features that are valuable such as the account takeover and various antivirus features.

It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. 

It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size.

Learning capability of the device is quite weak.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable and has strong performance.

The solution is scalable and is currently being met with high demand on the clients side.

Support response time to a given problem could be much faster. This may be due to time zone limitations as well as the amount of time it takes the representative to understand the scope of the issue.

Initial installation requires a lot of customizations that depend on the environment and use case of the client. For clients looking to maximize all policies, settings, and features provided, their setup could take up to one year.

Two engineers are required for deployment.

Licensing can range from one to twenty thousand dollars annually. Additionally, some features, including software support, require an annual subscription as well.

This is a good WAF solution that I would rate a nine out of ten.

We have an Akamai cloud-based solution for it. We have an in-house customer, and they have their own Akamai cloud for WAF. As a solution provider, we are working with their private Akamai WAF. 

Configuration for different application sources is most valuable. We can segregate the traffic that an application is carrying and identify the sizing in Imperva.

It is quite proficient in terms of logs reports, and it provides tight control for policy configuration. So, there can't be any unwanted applications on the internal LAN site. It is quite restrictive, which is a plus point. The sizing of an application is quite easy to understand while we are configuring and deploying Imperva.

It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that. 

I have about two to three years of experience with Imperva. I'm working as a GA consultant for cybersecurity and information security. I'm working on different security solutions such as WAF, IAM, DDoS, Azure firewall proxy, and antivirus. I work with different customers, and I also do the architecture review or assessment.

Its stability is quite good. It is not at all an issue. 

It is also quite good performance-wise. We are confident about its performance.

It is for large-scale enterprises where the traffic is huge, and there are many internet-facing applications, which is a plus point of Imperva.

We don't have the HA mode for the respective solution in Imperva, which has to be there when we have the DC and DR locations. We can activate only one solution at DC, but while we are conducting the drills between DC and DR, it is quite difficult to import all the configurations at the DR location in Imperva. It takes time.

Their support is good. It is not an issue. Whenever we have any questions or concerns, we're getting an appropriate solution for our queries. 

Some of the clients have had direct support from Imperva, and some of the clients had a third-party vendor. We also get support from a local Imperva employee. When I was working for a bank, there was good support from this person who was working with Imperva. 

The support for the setup is very good from the provider, but it can be difficult for an engineer to have an in-depth understanding of the configuration of a policy for an application.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.