Imperva Data Security Fabric Reviews

We use Imperva Data Security for API security and to protect data from various threats. It plays a crucial role in application security, bot protection, and safeguarding our database. It is used for both application and database security, leveraging machine learning for automation and providing flexible implementation options.

Imperva Data Security has significantly advanced our database and application security, automated many processes, and reduced the human error risk. It offers a stable, scalable solution that simplifies management and enhances data and application protection. Our clients have experienced improved API security and overall data threat protection.

The most valuable features include a great level of automation, machine learning for attack validation, and a very flexible and comfortable management console. It is very useful for both application and data security. Additionally, it has the nearest false positive rate, ensuring that good traffic is not blocked while protecting against attacks.

One area for improvement is the inclusion of a load balancer in on-premises solutions. Some customers have found the pricing to be high, although the subscription model has made it more flexible. Also, better integration of load balancers for application security could be an added advantage.

We have been using Imperva Data Security to distribute and manage database and application security for approximately ten years.

The solution is very stable. We have had no issues with the hardware devices breaking down, indicating its robustness and reliability.

Imperva Data Security offers excellent scalability. It is very flexible and can handle different sizes and requirements efficiently, scaling from smaller implementations to larger, more complex deployments.

Customer support from Imperva is very good, rated nine to ten points. They provide first-line support for the Russian-speaking region and a big team of security experts who are available twenty-four-seven to assist customers.

We have knowledge of IBM Guardium but are primarily focused on Imperva Data Security. Other solutions do not offer the comprehensive functionality that Imperva Data Security provides.

The initial setup of Imperva Data Security is generally straightforward but may take some effort. For most deployments, it takes about one to two weeks, with involvement from various departments to tune and switch the traffic.

Implementation is usually managed internally, with two engineers supporting all solutions in countries with hundreds of installations. Assistant by partner firms is also commonplace based on customer requirements.

Pricing can be considered high by some customers, but the subscription model helps in making it more flexible. Imperva offers value for its price because it invests significantly in research and development.

IBM Guardium is a competitor, particularly for data activity monitoring and Data Security. However, it doesn't match the comprehensive functionality of Imperva Data Security.

The solution scales very flexibly and is generally easy to maintain. It is a very automated system, making it less complex to manage. The reporting and compliance tools are very powerful and flexible. The solution's stability and reliability are exceptional.

Our primary use case for the solution is as a data lake for database activity, so it centralizes and normalizes all the data.

All the data in different databases and activities are centralized and normalized, making reporting easy. Additionally, it allows us to run models against it and do reports against it without understanding the different database technologies. We find all these features and capabilities valuable.

We have been using the solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable, but currently, we only have three people supporting the entire platform for maintenance which is not ideal.

I cannot comment on scalability as we are yet to scale and have not had issues with it. Approximately 100 different users on application teams are utilizing the solution for database activities, audit-related data and reports.

We have had a good experience with technical support, and we don't have any complaints. We have contacted them through IBM because they're the reseller and also directly. The technical support team is solid.

The initial setup is straightforward. I rate it a nine out of ten.

I cannot comment on the overall pricing of the solution because we purchased it through IBM, but IBM is quite expensive, so we are considering moving to another solution.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. It can be simplified as it is a little complicated. However, it has a lot of flexibility and capability. My advice to users considering the solution is to look at their requirements and see if they align with their needs. Ensure that some use cases are tested on the solution before purchasing because it is important to ensure the monitoring works.

We are using Imperva SecureSphere Database Security for database protection.

The most valuable features of Imperva SecureSphere Database Security are vulnerability assessment, enrichment security policy, and security

Imperva SecureSphere Database Security can improve something in all the versions I have used.

In an upcoming release, there should be a more simplistic way to learn the policy. The security policies can be complex, you need to know the attacks in order to give the portal a security policy. They should be more user-friendly to a level you do not need an expert.

I have been using Imperva SecureSphere Database Security for approximately 10 years.

Imperva SecureSphere Database Security is stable.

Imperva SecureSphere Database Security is suitable for small, medium, and enterprise companies.

The support of Imperva SecureSphere Database Security has good support.

The initial setup of Imperva SecureSphere Database Security is straightforward if you have the experience. If you are able to configure the solution well it can be implemented in one day.

The price of the solution is reasonable. The cost of the solution depends on the customer, they have the flex protect licensing which can vary in price.

My advice to others is before they go and implement a database security device, you need to know exactly what you need. You need to do the right review on your network and see what is the case study that you will need in order to protect the database in the best way. 

I rate Imperva SecureSphere Database Security a nine out of ten.

The solution provides significant benefits such as compliance and security. Its data risk analytics tool helps reduce numerous events to more manageable incidents.

The product's most valuable features are PPA auditing and database assessments. It has an efficient real-time alert functionality as well.

The platform doesn’t support some newer databases, such as Oracle on Ubuntu or databases running on Gatsby. Coverage for certain banking databases, like T24, needs enhancement as well.

Additionally, its encryption capabilities need improvement. 

We have been using Imperva SecureSphere Database Security for four years. 

The technical support services could improve in terms of response times. It often takes too long to get issues resolved. They could provide live support sessions as well. 

Neutral

The pricing is reasonable and competitive. It is affordable for most enterprises, although costs can vary depending on the modules. There are additional costs for support services. 

The solution's data masking feature is excellent and works very well. It effectively supports compliance needs. It has improved visibility and real-time alerting, making it easier to identify and respond to malicious activity.

It uses database profiling to learn normal behavior and detect anomalies. It creates a baseline for detecting unusual activities.

The interface has remained the same for years, and an update would be beneficial.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

I have worked with IBM before, and I prefer its ease of deployment and management. Imperva SecureSphere Database Security has tricky deployment, whereas IBM's deployment is straightforward because of the UI.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The tool's pricing is flexible and affordable for small and medium enterprises.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We are system integrators, so we mostly work on implementing projects. We don't handle maintenance or administration. Our focus is on implementation.

We use it for database security, vulnerability analysis, discovery, and handling requests from applications and users.

It's not just one feature because the whole process is important, starting from discovery to protection and prevention. If we use agent-based functionality instead of a gateway, the solution becomes more feature-rich.

Mostly in areas like data masking since they previously had a product called "camouflage," but it was dropped. It would be better to have something similar to that. 

Additionally, improvements can be made in data enrichment, aggregation of data from different perspectives, and enhancing the GUI (Graphical User Interface) for a better user experience.

We have experience in implementing the solution. It has been almost four years.

I would rate the stability of this solution a seven out of ten. There's some room for improvement in terms of stability.

I would rate the scalability of this solution as seven out of ten. It's scalable, but further implementation and development would make it even better.

We have been able to handle everything on our own. As partners, we are technical savvy.

The initial setup is actually quite easy. It's not something hard to do, but having some experience with the product is helpful.

If it's only the deployment, it takes around two to three days. But if we consider tuning and ongoing processes, the time for deployment varies.

ROI depends on the use case. Most companies use it for security and compliance. So, it varies based on the specific use cases.

It's not a cheap solution.

I would recommend considering Imperva. It's important to conduct a proof of concept (POC), include a list of potential different vendors or products, and make an informed decision.

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

Reporting is the most valuable aspect. It's very fast, even versus IBM. IBM could take three, or four days to get a report. In Imperva, everything is online, and you get the reports very fast. 

It is very easy to configure the new dashboards, and reporting is easy to do. It takes maybe an hour to do it. 

The solution is very stable. 

We'd like better compliance with cyber security and legal as well as other areas. 

I'd like to see some sort of solution for storage. For example, if someone in the company is doing some backup, I cannot reach that information in the discovery and in the protection. I only can protect the information, the databases that I use that are in developer or Q&A, and not those databases that are in the backups. It's a limitation.

I've been using the solution for three years. 

This is a stable, reliable product. It never fails. There are no bugs or glitches. 

There are six areas that are using the solution, and each area has maybe three or four users, at least. Risk, compliance, operations, and internal security, for example, are some areas that use it and get reports. 

I'm not sure if we have plans to increase usage. I am covering all the databases right now. I have no other space to do it. Of course, if we are going to grow and use more databases, I'm going to use this solution. That said, right now, all the databases are covered.

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs or extra fees beyond the license itself. 

Have compared the solution to IBM. Previously, I was an IBM customer, and IBM would take maybe a week to have a good configuration. 

With Imperva, it's very easy to configure. It's very easy to get the reports. The reports are coming fast, and you are saving a lot of money if you send the logs to Splunk since Splunk charges per alert. In the Imperva solution, instead of sending tons of alerts, it is consolidating everything. It helps me save money with Splunk. 

I am a consultant. 

I have been working with the previous version of the product. Right now, the latest one is the Data Security Fabric.

It is very easy to use, and it helps us to discover the databases. In some cases, the shadow IP or the business areas are not reporting that they are using other databases. With the Imperva solution, I can find the other databases that are not reported to IT, and it's very easy to know where they are, where the information is, and what kind of information it is, if we are talking about the personal data or if we are talking about a financial data, et cetera. It's very easy to find the databases, and to know what kind of information is in each one of those databases. It's so helpful.

It helps a lot to have a consultant as they have the knowledge and experience a company can use. Even if a solution is very easy to implement, it helps to have the knowledge and experience of partners. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution  just to monitor database activity on all the in-house databases.

I like almost everything about the solution. That includes sensitive data scanning, which is what is the most important. The data discovery is great as well. 

I like the activity monitoring. That was the main reason we purchased the tool.

The integration is great.

They do quite a lot of feature updates. 

The solution needs local support.

They need to do a little bit more knowledge-sharing with the tool. Knowledge-sharing is not what you normally get with Microsoft, Symantec, or any other tools that are leaders in their respective spaces. This is more of a closed-group type of solution only, whereby the information is only accessible to certain groups, or maybe in certain countries. It needs a broader, more accessible knowledge base. 

There could be more on the monitoring side of things. They need more monitoring tools within the tool itself. Although it does a good job monitoring databases, in terms of the health of its agent gateways to verify communication and all that, there are basically no utilities available within the tool.

I've used the solution for a little over three years. 

The stability is average. I'd rate it three and a half out of five in terms of stability. It's not too bad. 

This is a highly scalable product. I'd rate it four out of five in terms of its ability to scale. 

We have 15 people using the solution.

Local companies have limited exposure to the tool There's professional support and support from the providers, however, if they don't know too much about it, they cannot provide adequate help. 

Positive

While I didn't handle the initial deployment myself, from the training I have done, it is my understanding that the implementation process would not be that hard. 

I'm not sure how many people were involved in the deployment. 

I handle any maintenance myself with the sales provider. There might be six people available to maintain the product. There would be about three from the customer side and two from the service provider's side.

We did have a third party assist with the initial setup. They were from the vendor. 

I am not sure how much the licensing is exactly. that said, my understanding is that it is expensive. 

We're customers and end-users.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

It's pretty good in terms of capabilities. I'd rate it eight out of ten. 

I use SecureSphere to monitor our core databases and privilege operations by administrators, and to provide compliance reports.

In terms of regulatory compliance, one of the key requirements is to ensure that our core databases are monitored. SecureSphere allows us to generate details to prove that we're compliant with all requirements.

The most valuable feature is the automatic reports on new databases, which gives us up-to-date inventory management.

Sometimes the reports are cumbersome, and you have to drill down to get more information. SecureSphere also sometimes needs a lot of maintenance to keep the agents running on the database. In the next release, Imperva should include a preventative solution that will stop an attack before it happens or read the behavior of particular accounts and act on it. They should also make SecureSphere available on mobile so that if an administrator isn't on-prem, he can access the solution via the internet wherever he may be.

I've been using this solution for almost three years.

SecureSphere has been very stable until recently, due to the addition of new source databases causing performance issues.

SecureSphere is very scalable.

Imperva's technical support has been good. In the past, it sometimes took a long time to resolve an issue, but more recently, the responsiveness has been very impressive.

Neutral

Previously, we used Oracle Audit Vault, but its reports were a little complex, and their support was not so impressive.

The initial setup was straightforward, and the deployment took between one and two weeks.

Our deployment was done in-house.

SecureSphere has resulted in us receiving audit exceptions, especially from the final details, which is a big deal to my organization since we have to be compliant.

I would recommend SecureSphere to other users and advise making a dedicated team available to work on the solution and configure the correct set of policies so they can get value for their money. I'd give SecureSphere a rating of eight out of ten.

The use case is for database services, security purposes, and access capabilities. In DAM, we cannot use inline mode due to the blocking that is there. Details can be shared and accessed to see, for example, information about the DB, who's using it, its applications, et cetera. There are all kinds of reporting that can be accessed. We submit reports to the customer.

The audit feature is great. It is totally encrypted. Nobody can tamper with the details. For example, a DB admin can change the audit, however, if they are using the DAM product, that is totally different infrastructure so that the log, since it is an agent-based solution, whatever the activity will be done in the server regarding the database audit will be captured by the audit and that agent. The communication is totally encrypted and nobody can tamper with that data.

The initial setup is not overly complex.  

Some cloud versions are not supported by the agent. For example, we had a client that wanted to move to the cloud and wanted to use AWS, however, it was not possible. Imperva should have every kind of agent.

I've used the solution for around three years. I've used it for a while now. 

The solution is stable. It's very reliable and the performance is good.

It's a scalable solution. It's good. If we can just change the gateway or if it is a VM right now, we can upgrade the resources, or we can install many more agents in the server, in other servers, and we can take more servers behind it so that we can capture all the data for any of the server.

Technical support is good. Sometimes we have to raise a ticket and we get good, proper support. There's no issue.

The the setup itself is not too complex, it's conceptual. You have to understand at least the basics of the database. That's it. You don't have to be a DB admin, however, as a security engineer, you just need some small knowledge of a database, for example, what the database is, what the table is, et cetera.

We are partners. 

I'd recommend the solution. If a company has a plan for the Imperva DAM solution, it can, while still not using the Imperva WAF solution. The WAF solution is also good. We can use the WAF as well as DAM. We have a box, a gateway, or management that is used for both cases.

If an organization wants to do both the cases like I have a database, I have a web server, I want to secure both the infrastructures, I know I can strictly go for the Imperva, and Imperva will give management of two gateways for two different solutions, and that's it. It can be a complete package.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.