Imperva DDoS Reviews

We are using the solution as a WAF. Beyond that, I can't divulge too much information about the details surrounding how we use the solution as part of a confidentiality agreement we're under with clients.

The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure. 

The solution keeps itself up to date itself and there's no customization that we need to do. It makes it extremely easy and cut back on the amount of work required, and saves us on man-hours.

The initial setup is fairly easy.

The log analytics interface within Incapsula isn't really good. For example, if you have to get all logs from there, it's a very cumbersome process.

The solution doesn't seem to come with any other additional features. There are other products in the market today that give you an overall network perimeter protection. Incapsula is good for what it is, but it can expand its horizon a lot if it decides to include more network perimeter protection features and capabilities. It needs items, for example, at endpoints and some sort of firewall that can work at multiple levels. Items of that nature will really bump up the security and make it a much better product.

We've been using the solution for a while now. It's been about three or four years at least.

The solution is fairly stable. I don't think we've had to deal with crashes of the system. There aren't bugs and glitches. We find it to be reliable.

We haven't had any issues with the scalability the solution provides. If a company needs to scale this product they can do so pretty easily.

I've never contacted technical support, and I'm unsure if anyone on my team has, either. I wouldn't be able to speak to the quality of service they provide.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It was pretty straightforward.

The deployment of the solution, which included the design phase of the process, took a few months to complete.

We have our own in-house team that handles any maintenance that needs to happen on an ongoing basis.

We're simply a customer. We don't have a business relationship with the company at this time. We use the product ourselves. We aren't resellers or integrators.

I'd advise other companies, based on the scale of the organization and complexity, that if one has to choose a product, a company cannot choose a product from someone else's say so. It would depend on how complex their network design is. If it's fairly simple, then there's only one thing they need there. Multiple layers mean that this solution may not be the right product. A company has to do the research to find out if there are other products that are offering more of what they want, according to their unique requirements.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If the solution was a bit more complete, and offered, for example, perimeter protection, I would give it higher marks.

The primary use is the protection of our environment and client environments from intrusion and malicious attacks.

The product improves our organization by defending infrastructures from malicious behaviors. It also allows us to provide a reliable product to our clients who need a similar solution.

The most valuable features for our organization are auditing capabilities and compliances. The product meets the needs of our business model and we can see the health of the architecture at a glance. There are some instances where a client needs to meet with compliances in their industry, and this product is capable of meeting those needs.

One thing that they really could improve on is the depth of the analytics. The company needs to think more about the risk and analytic side of the application to supply the user with more information to evaluate and use in resolving issues. It is good to be able to depend on the product to provide a reliable solution, but it is better to take steps to resolve issues overall. This means giving information to the user that will help them identify exactly what the issues are. Risk analytics need to improve and this can be done easily.

This is a very stable product. Our clients have never complained about downtime or issues with functionality.

The product is easily scalable. We currently work with five to six customers who are on this solution. They are organizations of mixed size from small to enterprise. There is no problem adjusting the scale up or down to meet their needs and budget.

We have not needed to have much interaction with the support teams but when we do they address the problem quickly and with a high level of accuracy. The support, in my opinion, is very good.

Deployment is always straightforward. You just follow the instructions. With our experience, the product takes very little time to install and configure.

As we are a partner and a reseller, we are familiar with the product we do the installations for clients ourselves. We rarely have any issues with the installations.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the Incapsula platform as somewhere between an eight to nine. The obvious fault is the lack of better reporting. However, it is a good, functional product and we recommend it to clients who will not have to do very much to maintain the product.

• CDN
• Site performance

The website itself is our first priority and we have seen improvements in that area -- it's faster.

Although we're only using it for the accelerator part, the purging of files and the way this feature functions could use improvement. It requires the user to either purge everything or go through specific files, but if you do, the latter doesn’t always work. So with the single files sometimes there is more difficulty.

I've used it for a few months now.

No issues. It was very straightforward.

No issues.

It meets our needs right now. In the following months we are well within our package, but in the long term, we have to see if the cost will go up too much for our project’s needs. We are well covered for now.

9.5 -- they're very good.

9.5 -- turnaround is very fast.

No, as we are a fairly new project so we have no other experience with another solution. However, we did look at CloudFlare, Limelight, and CDN networks.

I had a gut feeling about the product right from the get-go.

Very straightforward setup.

It really depends what you're looking for. If you need to have a straightforward CDN, this CDN would probably be too expensive. If you want one solution with an all-in-one package for CDN and acceleration, I would definitely recommend Incapsula.

It helped us to define wherever there was illicit traffic between our webs, and improved the control we achieved.

The ability to trace each connection, and to have logs to be able to differentiate between a positive and a false-positive intruder action.

It is handy to retrieve and download the logs to line up separate actions to identify possible intruder behaviour.

At that moment, I miss being able to integrate the dashboard with other BI tools we are using. We have to export and import data to be able to present it, and doing so is a lot of work.

Not at all. 

It was a bit pointless to know how many sites were offline every time a spot in the world decided to do maintenance, but we like it as we can handle worldwide issues, knowing what is going on there.

No issues at all, it fulfills our expectations in terms of scalability.

Great.

We had used many local, and some cloud-based solutions (like Azure, Advanced Nagios, Centreon). We switched for the scalability of the solution, the reporting features it has, as well as the availability to fine tune the solution. 

It was straightforward, but we had to fine tune it.

The initial setup blocked some cookies and data from our scrapers which, they said, they never received from us. We investigated and found the WAF was blocking them. It was a lot of work.

It's worth it. It's a fine solution for medium/big companies worried about attacks that happen in the wild.

Centreon and Azure.

My best advice could be, if you don't have the staff to carry out security in a proper way, have a tool do it, but use a specialized tool like this one, and don't re-invent the wheel.

Also, in our case, we soon realized that we needed an expert to fine tune it and to obtain all the features we wanted.

I like the interface, customer service, and info updates.

We can now quickly respond to issues, as opposed to trying to find the technical problem on our end. We can now quickly address the problems of our clients in an effective manner.

I have found some issues with caching; seems to be inconsistent

I have used it for five months.

We have not encountered any deployment issues.

We have encountered very few stability issues, but those could be more due to the stability of our servers.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

Customer service is 8/10.

Technical support is 8/10.

We did not previously use a different solution, but we researched other solutions. Incapsula was highly regarded and we were simply wowed.

Initial setup was pretty straightforward on our end. Thanks for that!

We did the implementation in house using our own personnel.

I'm not sure about ROI.

Customer Support has been the biggest help in dire situations. Their control panel is nice but support has been the best.

When under DDoS, we are able to get piece of mind to our clients since they know a large, technical company is dedicated to getting the issues resolved.

More products, especially for smaller companies that could benefit them.

About 3 months.

None.

None yet.

Not that I know of.

10/10

8/10

We had a sysadmin but he was unable to keep up. No other parties were used.

Yes, it was straightforward for our IT team to implement.

In house.

We ate the cost so it wasn't passed on to the client.

From my understanding, our CEO had multiple parties on the table but decided Incapsula was the best fit for us.

We are using Incapsula as our web application firewall and for DDoS protection, and it performs really well at its job. Incapsula packs some great features, such as SSL support, content caching and the ability to 'play' with the rules as much as you'd like.

Since this is the very first WAF solution that we evaluated and tried to integrate into our AWS environment, I can't really say that it has improved anything, but the fact is, we never looked the other way.

Incapsula has a built-in monitoring module, but it is a paid feature; I would expect that for the price we pay for the basic service, we would be able to integrate a monitoring solution, even a simple one.

In addition to that, Incapsula doesn't feature the option to add/remove available SSL protocols and/or ciphers.

We have been using Incapsula for a little more than six months.

The only problem we encountered with Incapsula regarding deployment is with their Performance solution that allows caching the hosted sites. The dynamic caching sometimes causes issues and we need to manually purge all of the cache from their system after a new version has been deployed, in order for new content to load properly.

Technical support is excellent. In the few times we tried to contact Imperva's support, we received quick and swift replies.

I did not previously use a different solution.

The initial deployment is very straightforward; you follow a very simple setup wizard that guides you which changes you need to perform and where.

We received the recommendation regarding Incapsula from Emind, a third-party vendor that helped us deploy our environment over at Amazon. The rest was performed by our in-house IT/Devops teams.

I highly recommend Incapsula for anyone that is looking to integrate a WAF and DDoS protection into their environment.