Radware Cloud WAF Service Reviews

We are generally using the Radware Cloud WAF Service to secure our external web applications. We are not using the API Discovery feature as of now, but we are using the Web DDoS module of the Radware Cloud WAF Service.

Radware Cloud WAF Service has reduced the time needed for management. Overall, it saves us time. At the start, we had to give a lot of time to Radware Cloud WAF Service as we were unaware of the portal. Now, we have automated most parts, and we are just checking it once a day for about 10 to 15 minutes.

The combination of negative and behavioral-based positive security models for our security strategy was helpful. We had a number of requests that were not supposed to be entertained by the web server. Now, we are blocking them via the WAF. Regarding protecting against zero-day attacks, we have not received any zero-day attacks so far.

We use the source blocking feature with IP blocks. The solution's proactive and holistic approach based on cross-module correlation has effectively protected our applications. Earlier, we allowed most IPs to access our application, but now, with that module, we only allow certain IPs from which we genuinely expect requests, significantly reducing attack traffic and bandwidth utilization.

The mitigation has been very good. We have not seen many false positives compared to our previous experiences, and the mitigation has been good as of now.

The integration process was easy and smooth. However, many of our systems are not integrated with Radware Cloud WAF Service. 

The best feature of the Radware Cloud WAF Service would be that it is easy to use. The panel itself is very easy to understand, and we can get along with the panel easily. Also, the security features provided by Radware Cloud WAF Service are very good as compared to other vendors. Apart from that, the features are good.

The log feature in Radware Cloud WAF Service has some limitations. Unfortunately, the portal does not provide much information. If there is an issue, we may need to raise a case with the vendor to obtain further details. Aside from that, the other features are quite good.

In the Radware Cloud WAF Service, areas that have room for improvement include the logs part. Currently, we only see logs for requests that are getting blocked. It would be helpful if there was a feature to view all application traffic logs. Also, the visibility on the configured rules in Radware Cloud WAF Service is not better; we do not have any visibility on those rules. The two areas are logs and the visibility of rules, which need improvement.

I have been using the Radware Cloud WAF Service for more than a year and a half.

Regarding stability, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

For scalability, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Currently, we have six users working with the solution.

It has been good. I would rate their support as a nine out of ten.

Apart from the Radware Cloud WAF Service, we tried F5 Cloud WAF as well. As compared to F5, using Radware Cloud WAF Service was easy to use and easy to understand. All the security features we require are straight away given in the console. Creating an application and enabling the security features is not much harder as compared to F5.

The deployment of the solution was easy.

The solution does not require any maintenance.

We purchased the solution through a partner.

Overall, the Radware Cloud WAF Service has helped reduce our false positives significantly, reducing our bandwidth cost. We can say it has halved the bandwidth cost by blocking true positive attack traffic.

It was better and efficient compared to other vendors.

Regarding securing business continuity with the Web DDoS feature for HTTP L7, we had a couple of applications with a DNS entry receiving false alerts, which meant false traffic. This caused a huge consumption of our bandwidth, so we raised a case with Radware. They suggested we use the Web DDoS feature. By using that feature, we are blocking most of the true positive requests that we should not be entertaining on our bandwidth, saving costs on bandwidth as well.

We keep the controls on report mode, analyze the logs for about seven days, and if we find any true false positives, we check on them. After seven days, we move the controls to block mode.

We are not using the CDN service offered by Radware with the Cloud WAF Service. 

I would recommend Radware Cloud WAF Service to other users. My overall rating for this solution is a nine out of ten.

We are a Data Center company with a lot of internal applications and customers. Our primary use case is to protect all internal applications hosted on Public Cloud with Radware Cloud WAF. This protection is crucial for safeguarding our customers' applications from external threats and ensuring high availability and security.

The most important aspect of Radware Cloud WAF is that it is over the cloud, offering a comprehensive solution that includes WAF, API protection, bots, and Layer 7 DDoS. This combination efficiently blocks a large number of unknown threats and ensures high security and uptime for our internal applications as well as our customers' applications, making it a revenue-generating tool. Cloud WAF provides excellent analytical dashboards that allow us to report, track, and resolve many issues quickly.

The reporting features could be more intuitive with more real-time monitoring, which would help make faster decisions. While false positives have reduced by 35%, more granular control can simplify it for new users. The initial complexity should be reduced to make it simpler for new customers. Furthermore, support staff needs to be more proactive so that issues can be resolved at lower levels without escalation.

I have been using Radware Cloud WAF for four years.

There has been downtime only once in the last year. Otherwise, the product has been stable.

Since it's a Cloud WAF, it is always scalable. We can subscribe to more applications and protections as needed.

We have ERT premium support with a five-minute SLA, and the service has been reliable. We have additional support from Radware management. The quality of support is excellent, and we haven't faced any major issues.

Positive

Previously, I used to work with F5 WAF in my earlier company, not the current one.

The initial setup was complex and took a long time to complete.

We used a dedicated team for deployment as we wanted to train our team thoroughly.

Radware Cloud WAF has helped reduce false positives and efforts, which in turn, improved the total cost of ownership by freeing up time to focus on other projects.

Pricing could be more competitive, especially for smaller customers. However, the technical excellence of the product balances out the pricing aspect.

Earlier, I used F5 WAF in a different company.

Overall, I would rate Cloud WAF nine out of ten. 

Despite its initial complexity, the product is a one-stop shop for our cloud security needs. It integrates well with applications, simplifying protection and operations. 

I recommend Radware can make further improvements in pricing and simplifying initial use for new customers.

The product is used for the protection of our financial institution’s web applications and digital assets against DDoS attacks and other OWASP threats.

Radware gives us greater confidence in the availability and security of our assets, allowing our team to focus less on infrastructure protection and more on our core responsibilities. The product also provides a comfortable and intuitive UI with a wide range of useful security features.

Anti-DDoS protection is one of the most valuable features for us, particularly because availability is critical for our organization. At the same time, the overall WAF functionality is equally important, as it provides an additional layer of protection against web-based attacks and helps us secure our applications more comprehensively.

The main area for improvement is the flexibility of the security rule engine. Compared with some other vendors, there are fewer available conditions and limited support for complex rule logic. For example, there is no Destination Port condition, port-based restrictions cannot be expressed through URI matching, and the UI does not appear to support nested logical expressions beyond ALL and ANY. More granular conditions and support for nested AND/OR logic would make the solution significantly more flexible for advanced security policies. The limitation is the inability to construct something like: (A AND B) OR (C AND D) / A AND (B OR C).

We have used the solution for one year.

We previously used another security solution. We decided to move away from it because it did not meet our expectations, particularly regarding its cloud-based capabilities. We are more satisfied with Radware Cloud WAF and would recommend it over the previous solution, especially for cloud-based web application protection.

There are no comments.

We considered other solutions such as Barracuda, Imperva, and Cloudflare.

NA

My use case for Radware Cloud WAF Service is mostly defending web applications against web application-related attacks, and it is mostly related to bots. I have onboarded multiple websites onto Radware Cloud WAF Service, so by default, it prevents SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and other attacks, and it even detects any bots and fake account creations on our main website.

The best feature in Radware Cloud WAF Service is its bot management, as there are many fake account creations on our website, and this feature is great. I also use Radware Cloud WAF Service for load balancing and DDoS-type attacks, fulfilling multiple use cases.

The effectiveness of automated blocking in the Radware Cloud WAF Service stems from its ability to automatically block known botnets, proxies, and malicious IPs from the global threat intelligence feed, making it highly beneficial. 

Our environment is safe due in part to behavior and anomaly detection, which provides IP-based, subnet-based, and country-based blocking.

I use the automated source blocking feature in Radware Cloud WAF Service. From my experience regarding incoming bot traffic, I discovered there were DDoS attacks in some areas, with multiple botnets being created, which were automatically blocked by Radware Cloud WAF Service due to the recognition of known botnets.

My thoughts on the automated analytics for looking at events in Radware Cloud WAF Service are positive; it learns automatically based on behaviors and threat intelligence IP addresses, blocking anomalies. If an anomaly is found, we get a detection and it is automatically blocked, while the model learns the traffic patterns of onboarded applications, aiding in the fine-tuning of security policies.

I use the API discovery feature for IP blocking. My impressions of the end-to-end API protection within Radware Cloud WAF Service are that both communications are encrypted, providing security during API discovery, which also offers authentication before accessing anything. After successful authentication, it is helpful for access and authentication, as well as traffic prevention.

I use the CDN services offered by Radware together with Cloud WAF Service for load balancing. Using CDN together with Radware Cloud WAF Service is easy, as everything can be implemented at one point, protecting against web application attacks and DDoS attacks. This integration is quite good.

Radware Cloud WAF Service has helped reduce false positives, although I have not encountered many use cases, since we have around seven to ten applications onboarded. We have numerous instances in the prevention of malicious IPs and blocking web attacks, but for false positives, I can say it is about ten to 20 percent.

The real-time BLA detection and mitigation in Radware Cloud WAF Service has affected threat management positively; while it might sometimes trigger false positives, it effectively detects behavior and helps block threats about 50% of the time.

In Radware Cloud WAF Service, areas for improvement include behavioral and anomaly detection, where it could be better by reducing false positives. The AI feature can also improve; while the API is fine, behavioral and anomaly detection sometimes learns automatically from the traffic, potentially triggering false alerts.

I have been using Radware Cloud WAF Service for around two to three years.

Regarding the stability of the solution, I have observed some downtime in the portal, however, not in other respects, so I would rate it a seven out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Radware Cloud WAF Service a nine out of ten, as it is pretty good.

I would rate the technical support of Radware Cloud WAF Service a seven to eight out of ten.

Positive

My thoughts on Radware Cloud WAF Service's integration with other systems and applications are mostly positive; it's a pretty easy setup, as we just need to provide our applications and get ready to onboard. It is not complicated, and we just need to enable different services.

I am not much aware of the pricing; however, I've seen different WAF pricing, and this seems to be okay, cheaper.

When comparing Radware Cloud WAF Service with other WAF solutions, I find that some features are missing in other companies, which makes Radware Cloud WAF Service different. 

Additionally, the support that Radware Cloud WAF Service provides is good, unlike some others where the support is lacking.

I definitely recommend this product to other users, as it is a good product for those needing to protect their applications from fake account creations and web application attacks. 

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Radware Cloud WAF Service a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is defense against DDoS. We are using Radware Cloud WAF and load balancer solutions. We use it for our cloud infrastructure and various applications focusing on various security aspects.

It integrates seamlessly with our infrastructure, allowing us to manage DDoS attacks and load balancing efficiently.

The ability to easily handle configurations and the user-friendly nature of the solution make it accessible for various team members, including L1 and L2 users.

The load balancer is very good for DR purposes. Previously, our client had issues with DR, but it is no longer an issue. We can directly move from primary to secondary.

Radware Bot Manager has been very useful. If any user tries to save a password on a mobile or a browser, it blocks that. We can see all the details about the traffic and port requests.

API integration and documentation need to be improved. There should be more detailed documentation for API usage, rate limiting, CNAME, and DDoS functions. A lot of articles need to be added to their portal.

Additionally, enhancing the capabilities for bypass functions where users can manage URLs more flexibly, including the use of wildcard characters, would be beneficial.

We have been working with Radware Cloud WAF Service for a minimum of 18 months.

There have generally been no stability issues.

Radware Cloud WAF is scalable and accommodates our growing needs effectively.

We get proper solutions from them. The salesperson and other support resources have been good at providing solutions. I would rate their technical support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

I have used F5 which is a physical WAF solution. We switched to Radware Cloud WAF for its cloud-oriented capabilities and user-friendly interface, although the F5 solution was effective too.

Radware provides only three URLs for whitelisting, whereas F5 supports multiple URLs for whitelisting. Radware is also more complicated for customers when it comes to bypassing.

The initial setup of Radware Cloud WAF is straightforward, allowing for easy configuration and integration within our existing infrastructure.

It does not require maintenance from our side. We just have to ensure that we have the correct licenses. They inform us of any maintenance window in advance.

We get good direct support from Pankaj at Radware. He has helped us with the implementation and understanding of Radware solutions. In case of any issues, I can ping him and get more information or resolution.

It has saved us time and money.

I am not directly involved in pricing and setup cost discussions, but it seems that Radware offers a more cost-effective solution compared to F5. It is considered a good value for our budget.

Overall, I would rate Radware Cloud WAF as nine out of ten. It is a reliable solution with effective security features, though there are areas for improvement, particularly in API integration and documentation.

We are in the post-implementation phase of using Radware Cloud WAF Service right now, but we have been using a Radware solution for about six years in our company.

Right now, we are working on transitioning our systems to the cloud. We have just obtained the license and are currently testing the system as part of the implementation process. This started back in January of this year, and we are approaching one year of use. While we are in the post-implementation phase, our corporate structure has a lot of approval processes that require multiple steps. Because of this, we can't fully transition to the protection capabilities of Cloud WAF just yet. However, we are actively using and testing it, and we are taking note of all the results.

Our company works in banking, and every day we face malicious and suspicious requests incoming to our site. Radware Cloud WAF Service is helping protect against these threats effectively. When we were using physical hardware, it would become overloaded and go down, making it impossible to protect our site. Radware Cloud WAF Service protects all of the backend applications and services by defending against malicious and suspicious requests.

Automated analytics are easy to use. When we were using manual detection, it was difficult to detect certain traffic patterns. The automatic detection is very effective.

Radware Cloud WAF Service reduces false positives compared to our previous on-premises system. After implementing Radware Cloud WAF Service, I observed the alerts and noticed a significant reduction in false positive blocking. It has more advanced capabilities, including header request searching.

We have integrated it only with Splunk so far, and it's easy to integrate.

Bot Manager's configuration is straightforward. We input IP addresses, local IPs, and configure log sending to Splunk.

The interface is really cool, especially with the dark theme. It looks clean and organized, which I appreciate. It's not complicated at all.

Support is prompt and efficient. The response to our support tickets has been quick, and I'm really happy with that. Overall, I'm glad with my experience so far.

It is easy to use for me. I've already been working with the hardware and the portal for two years now. I know where everything is, so I find it easy.

They might need to add more integrations. Adding AI-based search capabilities would be beneficial, allowing us to search for the origins of bot attacks by country. The behavioral analysis could be made more efficient. While Bot Manager has many of these features already, there is room for further enhancement.

It is stable.

It is scalable. 

The support team responds quickly to our tickets, and I am very satisfied with their service.

Positive

The Radware deployment process was straightforward and easy to install. Our company has many approvals and processes, so it took over two weeks.

Our SOC team with ten people works with this solution. Our company has two teams working on security systems with three levels of engineers. I am a level two engineer handling configuration and monitoring. The level three engineers manage major updates and have comprehensive knowledge of the system.

We conducted POC testing with three systems: Akamai, Imperva, and Radware Cloud WAF Service. We only tested Imperva and Radware because Akamai did not meet our bank corporation's policies regarding reseller companies. Imperva had too many issues.

The Imperva cloud solution was located in Hong Kong, which was too far from Mongolia and caused internet connectivity issues. After testing it, we were not satisfied. We then tested Radware Cloud WAF Service and found it easier to use, particularly since we were already using Radware Bot Manager in the cloud.

Currently, we are not using the API discovery feature as we are in the pre-implementation phase of API protection. We are focusing on getting Radware Cloud WAF Service into production first. After that, we plan to implement additional features such as API security and customer security.

In Mongolia, we do not have a CDN and are currently using Akamai CDN. The situation in Mongolia is restricted and somewhat complicated.

I would recommend this solution. Radware is the largest company in the security solutions industry. They have many prototypes and numerous integrations. This is an important aspect of the purchasing process. Another key point is their support; they provide a quick response to your inquiries. Their service is easy to use. With Radware's cloud solutions, they cover all aspects of security effectively. They are able to provide comprehensive coverage for your needs.

I would rate Radware Cloud WAF Service an eight out of ten.

For all of our Israel posts, Radware Cloud WAF Service is the Web Application Firewall we replaced F5 with. We were searching for something with good service and cloud-based support, as I have a lot of websites in the cloud. It gives me more than I expected.

I really like the services. When I have attacks, Radware contacts me before I'm even aware there's a problem. They recognize if there's an attack from a certain country and ask if I want to block it. They provide all the necessary information, and there's always someone to talk to. They block every attack, and the team has the perfect protection for me. The solution helps reduce false positives by 30%, thanks to good implementation and exclusions. It gives me a lot of time because I don't need to manage it; Radware manages everything for me. I am very satisfied with the prevention from zero-day attacks, and Radware Bot Manager helps with bot traffic detection. They provide excellent compliance support. I highly recommend this product to others because I'm satisfied with the mitigation and proactive protection.

I would like to see an improvement in the twenty-four-seven support service.

More than seven years.

The stability is excellent, and I would rate it ten out of ten.

Scalability is also excellent, with a rating of ten out of ten.

The customer service and support are very good, and I would rate them ten out of ten.

Positive

I replaced F5 with Radware Cloud WAF Service because I needed something with good service on the cloud. The previous solution was not meeting my expectations.

The onboarding with the Radware team was good. They handled implementation and set up exclusions well to reduce false positives.

Radware Cloud WAF Service saves a lot of time for my employees since they no longer need to manage it directly. The solution manages everything, allowing my employees to focus on other applications.

The pricing is not cheap; it is expensive, but it is effective.

I highly recommend Radware Cloud WAF Service to others. I have recommended it to my colleagues in other companies, and they have also been satisfied with it. It's a very good product with excellent support and minimal false positives. Overall, it delivers everything required for protection. I would rate the overall solution ten out of ten.

I use Radware services to protect some web portals in my company from web application attacks. Specifically, I use their web application firewall.

I like the reliability of the system since it's quite reliable. Additionally, I appreciate the user interface, particularly from the reporting point of view. Configuration can sometimes be tricky as I have to know where the options are, which isn't very intuitive. However, apart from this, it is a good product and very reliable for me.

Sometimes, I encounter issues with password reset, particularly in the last two weeks. I tried to access the system, and it didn't recognize my password, even though I hadn't changed it. When I attempted the password reset from the login page, I didn't receive any email. This indicates some reliability issues or problems within the management interface.

I have been using Radware Cloud WAF for something like three years.

The stability of the solution is very good. I would rate it as nine out of ten.

I haven't used any of the integration capabilities, however, I would rate the scalability as nine out of ten.

The technical support is very good. They are usually very fast in response, and I think they deserve a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was not heavy. It was quite simple, and with the support from Radware's technical and commercial teams, I could set up the system in monitoring mode before moving into production.

I had calls with the technical support of Radware and the commercial team. The team was supportive throughout the process.

I find Radware Cloud WAF to be a quite expensive product compared to others. However, the quality-to-price ratio is very good.

I highly recommend Radware Cloud WAF for its reliability and fast support. However, the cost is something to consider as it might be on the higher side. 

Overall, I would rate Radware Cloud WAF as nine out of ten.

Radware offers a cloud, software, and hardware-based solution. It deals with all three platforms. 

1. They have a hardware device on which their software can be installed. We can manage all the load balancing with it. 

2. Similarly, for the Radware software, we can install the OVA file on our server and configure all the admin backend servers on it to perform services. 

3. In the cloud, we can use their API service to create a virtual platform for clients on which they can deploy and run their applications.

Cloud WAF blocks unknown threats and attacks. We have a monitoring tool, and security patches are released monthly. We can deploy these signatures on the WAF, which identifies threats based on IPs. There are multiple signatures for various attacks, like bot attacks, that we can monitor.

There is a forensic dashboard where we can identify real-time events, hits, and blocks. If there are genuine requests being blocked, we can deploy a custom page with a case number for users to resolve issues. For example, if a user triggers the Web Application Firewall (WAF) due to a misinterpreted service, they will see a blocking page with a case number. There's also an option to refine the WAF settings if it blocks a genuine request.

I also work with the API discovery feature in the Cloud solution. Once the API is enabled and the application vendor provides the API key, we can deploy our application. If the API is correct, it functions properly; otherwise, issues are highlighted on the dashboard. For example, cross-site scripting is blocked at the label level.

API discovery is straightforward to use. There is an option to add the API stream. If the API is correct, it will be processed; otherwise, the API service is blocked.

The dashboard provides multiple features and analytics tools to identify API issues. If there is a cost issue with an API, it can be identified, and we can report it.

It's not difficult to work with the API discovery feature because everything is reflected on the forensic dashboard. There's an option within the dashboard, under the security section, where you define the correct API. You can also identify and exclude specific APIs if needed. There's only one option to add to the API stream. If the API is correct, it will be processed; otherwise, it's blocked.

It's not difficult to identify API issues because when we define the API call, and it is incorrect or not valid, it won't sync with the vendor's application. They identify this and generate a blocking request, which helps us easily identify the issue.

It's mostly for the Alteon service. The Alteon load balancing part, particularly the SSL offloading and WAF offloading, is crucial. Offloading allows us to monitor and identify issues easily. I believe the SSL offloading is the most valuable feature.

It's easy to use, and the configurations are similar across different vendors. Compared to F5 and Citrix, Radware is easier to communicate with and use. The configuration process is simple, involving the creation of groups and pools, much like in F5. The SSL offloading is also very easy. Overall, I think it's a good solution.

The service we use through the cloud is very easy. We have one dashboard to manage everything, which is convenient.

The analytic dashboard could be integrated with other platforms like Splunk. In Splunk, the dashboard shows multiple things, and I think Radware could improve its dashboard in that regard.

In the WAF part, there are multiple things that are initiated, such as updates and patches. There's a global issue right now that we need to monitor on our side. I think the ability to monitor server-level updates and patches should be integrated into the WAF.

I have been using it for three to four years. 

If we raise an issue, they usually identify and resolve it by the end of the day or the next day. There haven't been any escalated cases on the cloud. However, we did encounter one issue regarding the filter and signature. We created a policy to block access from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other specific locations.

Although the policy was in place and checked, users from those locations were still able to access the application. This was a bug that we reported to the technical team. They identified an issue with their software version and provided us with a new version to update. After the update, the blocking feature worked correctly.

It's scalable. We can customize it as per our requirements. We can customize it in most cases.

In the State Bank of India project, we deployed it, and I believe two or three other banks are using Radware's WAF. Some applications are deployed globally, meaning they're used in Australia, America, and multiple countries. We have multiple deployment options for that. For example, the YONO application is deployed globally and used by many users in different countries. We can easily identify and track that traffic on the dashboard.

In addition, they have also deployed the DDoS service in WAF. So, in case of a DDoS attack or something similar, they can easily identify and monitor it.

It's software-only, so most of the time it works as intended. However, I did raise one request about a filter option in the dashboard not working perfectly. We identified that there was a version issue, and they fixed it in a new patch. They were able to easily identify and resolve the version issue.

They are not globally available but can manage and support us within a range of five to seven. They can usually provide support easily.

I have worked on Citrix as well. Both Citrix and Radware are similar, but in Citrix, some things are more lengthy. Radware is better integrated and easier to understand, so anyone can use it.

I haven't directly compared them, but F5 is very popular globally. Both are similar, but Radware lags behind F5 in a few features.

In terms of user experience and management, Radware is easier. However, F5 has better performance. 

Both are cost-effective, but Radware is less expensive because F5 licenses are costly. Technically, Radware is easier to understand.  

We currently use the integrated WAF option on the same device in our application (SBI). There is no dedicated WAF solution. There are two options: license-based and integrated. Using the integrated part helps to identify blocks and other issues effectively.

Integrating with other systems and applications in the environment:

Integration is not difficult. In the dashboard, under the policy section, we can find virtual services and easily enable the API service. Once enabled, WAF monitoring should also be enabled. We can then identify the application's requirements, like JSON ID, cookies, headers, what should be whitelisted, body size, etc. 

We can gather this information from the application owner during deployment to determine what needs to be whitelisted, such as extensions, zip files, XML files, and cookies.

Once we deploy an application, it doesn't take too much time because the application is already deployed. We also use the load balancing feature, so we just need to enable the security web application service. There is an option for this under virtual services where we can also enable it for bot protection. I think anyone can easily manage it if they know about these things.

Radware is signature-based. The patches and signatures are important because we cannot easily monitor them ourselves. They are regularly updated, I think, weekly, so that's helpful. I think this regular update makes it easier for us.

We are a managed service provider (MSP) for Radware. The technical support is handled directly by Radware, but we manage the technical aspects.

We use integrated and cloud solutions because we manage multiple applications for multiple vendors. Some vendors are using the integrated WAF, which is good. The cloud part is also managed by us, not the customer. We deploy everything, including signatures and patches, if needed.

We can deploy it within a month. It's very easy to deploy and work with. If you create load balancing and WAF configurations, both are very simple. The deployment process is easy if you know how to configure it. Anyone who knows the basics of networking and security can easily deploy it. The dashboard and management are also simple. There is no confusion.

If you're creating a virtual service, you can easily create the virtual service port and configure the backend server. It's very simple.

In F5, when creating a group, you need to take one pool service. But in Radware, you can create one group and easily select it. The dashboard and configuration in Radware are very simple.

We mostly deploy in one-arm mode, but there's also a two-arm mode. In one-arm mode, all applications and servers are on the same subnet. We take a single IP from the subnet (e.g., 10.86.11.x). We need three IPs: one for management and two for deployment and virtual services. 

When deploying an application, we can use the same IP range. We deploy all backend servers on the virtual service. We select the backend servers and multiple ports based on the requirements. We then configure the services on the virtual service and review everything. For networking, we need to do NATing if the application is globally accessible, which is also very simple.

The dashboard and conciliation aspects are straightforward in Radware.

Just as in the same domain, we can deploy mainly in one-arm mode, or two-arm mode. There are two different modes. Okay? But typically, we deploy in one-arm mode. In this mode, all applications and services should be on the same subnet. We can take a single IP from the same subnet, for example, if you have a subnet of twenty-three, like 10.86.11.something. We require three IPs in total. One IP for management, and two others for deployment and the virtual service. If we deploy an application, we can use that same IP range. We take it. And on this virtual service, we can deploy to all back-end servers. We can select the back-end server and multiple ports based on the requirements. We can select the ports we need and configure the services on them. On the virtual service, we can configure all the services and review everything. For networking, we need a NATing part if the application is globally accessible so we can NAT through their public IP. It's a very simple deployment process.

For a new project, it might take longer than a month due to approvals and networking configurations. These processes, especially to get approvals for NATing and network paths, can be take time. That's why it takes almost two months. However, if everything is ready, deployment and testing can be completed within five to ten days.

Two resources are enough for the deployment. From a maintenance perspective, not much is needed.

It does bring ROI.

Radware is less expensive because F5 licenses are costly. F5 charges for each and every license. For every virtual service you create, you need to pay additional license fees. The licenses are more COSTLY compared to Radware. 

Radware also has lower annual maintenance costs (AMC) compared to F5. F5 is more expensive than Radware, but it's the leading product globally.

It's not very costly because everything is license-based, all things depend on the license and annual maintenance contract (AMC). If you have an AMC, the cost will be higher. Without an AMC, the cost is less because the product itself is less expensive. But if you have the AMC, the cost will be higher.

If companies provide the signatures and patches perfectly because we can't easily identify new viruses or threats, we rely on the solution company to regularly update their software and devices. Radware is one such company that updates its patches and signatures monthly. They allow us to review all the CVEs and update their patches accordingly. So, I think it's a good option.

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten because there are some issues in the cloud part, where it lags. 

We use Radware Cloud WAF Service primarily for monitoring purposes within our organization.

I like the security features when looking at the dashboard where I can see a lot of attacks that are rejected and blocked. It's one of the best features, and I approve of this solution. Radware Cloud WAF Service ensures our systems are stable, running smoothly, and blocking all attacks effectively.

There should be more customization options for the dashboard, as it is currently fixed and cannot be modified. Additionally, the API is limited to data retrieval and does not support programmatic modifications. It would be beneficial if we could perform POST requests and integrate our applications more effectively.

I have been using Radware Cloud WAF Service for five months.

I rate the stability of Radware Cloud WAF Service as nine out of ten. There have been no issues with downtime, bugs, or glitches.

The scalability of Radware Cloud WAF Service is very good, and I would rate it nine out of ten in terms of handling the capacity and volume.

I would rate the technical support from Radware as a nine out of ten.

Positive

We previously used Imperva but switched to Radware Cloud WAF Service primarily due to pricing. Both products are top-ranking solutions, but Radware is cheaper.

The initial setup of Radware Cloud WAF Service was easy.

We received support from Radware, which made the implementation process easy.

The ROI for Radware Cloud WAF Service is prominent as it is twenty percent more cost-effective compared to Imperva.

When comparing the pricing of Radware Cloud WAF Service, I would rate it as seven out of ten, with one being cheap and ten being expensive.

Yes, we switched from Imperva to Radware Cloud WAF Service.

Overall, I would rate Radware Cloud WAF Service as eight out of ten. The areas for improvement include customization and API functionality. I would recommend Radware Cloud WAF Service because it is a good solution, and we are satisfied with the benefits it offers.