On the appliance, maybe the hardware could be improved. Most of Radware DDoS appliances are physical, so they could improve that aspect. In terms of the system and the functionality, Radware DDoS is constantly upgrading.
In Radware DDoS, everything is good as it is, but I think it can improve with more automation linked to the system. We have good real-time monitoring, and documentation is also helpful, but any integration with platforms such as Splunk would enhance it further. In terms of specific features missing in Radware DDoS, I would appreciate seeing an API Protector or similar capabilities that Akamai has. These allow for record creation on Akamai that Radware DDoS currently lacks.
Professional Consultor Digital Services at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Jan 11, 2026
Radware can improve in several specific areas. The downside is the marketing. Radware does not have the same presence as others, such as Cloudflare or Akamai. This is a key factor because many types of customers prefer other solutions due to marketing. In my experience, the cloud solution needs improvement. For example, Cloudflare is better in this aspect. This is the downside for Radware, but this is my opinion only. Marketing for the presence of different types of solutions is one area. Another is the cost. The different solutions for Radware DDoS are expensive. Better pricing is needed. The solution is very expensive, and a less expensive solution would be very beneficial because many people could acquire this solution and these products.
3rd Line Security Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Dec 16, 2025
One downside of Radware DDoS is that the GUI should be more user-friendly. I have experience in other platforms as well, and what I see with Radware is that it is not as user-friendly as the other ones, so that is definitely one thing that needs improvement. Additionally, I do not have an option to open a new tab within the existing GUI. If I want to open something in a new tab and try to compare it with what I have on the previous page, I cannot do it. I also note that as far as I know, Radware DDoS does not have any authentication countermeasures to mitigate any attacks, which needs to be addressed. I know it has protections for SYN floods and all, but that should be changed. It should be more transparent where proper authentication should happen with the source. In my opinion, Radware DDoS's response times after an attack need to be improved. The response time is pretty bad sometimes. The SecOps dashboards for monitoring and reporting the metrics are pretty bad. That is where the comparison with NetScout is more applicable because the NetScout reporting is really good. I am referring to the mitigation reports or the forensic reports. It is very hard to get a scaled report in Radware, and even after a mitigation, putting out a report for that specific mitigation is a hard process. That definitely needs improvement. The aforementioned SecOps dashboards provide historical information on protected objects, networks, and so on, but when it is a sample report, it is not that accurate. As the scale goes bigger, the accuracy of the report also degrades. Radware has not helped me reduce the number of false positives I receive in response to an attack because, as I mentioned, I do not use Radware DDoS as a detection mechanism. I have other detection mechanisms, so I do not work with Radware regarding false positive reductions. That is handled on a separate platform itself, so it is not needed here.
Associate Manager for Network and Cybersecurity at TP Northern Odisha Distribution Limited (TPNODL)
Real User
Top 5
Jul 23, 2025
There are areas where Radware DDoS could improve, specifically regarding centralized visibility. If someone is allowed access to one payment server but attempts to access the backend database and application servers from that source, we need to analyze the level of propagation. If they are performing suspicious activities such as random logins, it would be beneficial to have a centralized console that shows which IP is attempting which actions for greater visibility, enabling better analysis. To sum it up, we suggest that clear visibility within a management console could significantly enhance Radware DDoS's usability. We use Radware DDoS and Check Point for our public site because understanding the origin and pattern of public hits is crucial. If the console could segregate packets by type—such as HTTPS, logger, database-related queries, or other behavioral data—and generate reports accordingly, it would better aid our analysis.
There should be some extra layer of security and a method of advanced rate limiting. We can limit the number of IPs or URLs per session and per country. There should be improved bot management integration that mitigates bot-based DDoS attacks completely.
CIO at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
May 12, 2025
Their Cyber Security Controller portal, including its GUI and dashboard, could be more intuitive so CXOs can easily understand them. Improvements in visualization for reporting also need consideration. This feedback has already been provided directly to Radware DDoS Protection Service.
Sr IT Manager at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Apr 15, 2025
I want to improve the blocking time; it should be within 10 seconds because 18 seconds allows multiple transactions in the financial industry. I want the blocking time to be better than 18 seconds.
I suggest improvements to the user interface to make it easier to use and to find the necessary data for analysis. Although the data is present, accessing it for analysis could be more simplified.
Security Operations Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Feb 14, 2025
There's room for improvement in customization and integration. It would be better if routers and external firewalls could integrate with the solution. Additionally, when bugs are detected in a version during upgrades, there should be better communication about these bugs. They need to focus more on providing process documents highlighting bugs and their solutions. Sometimes there is leakage in the network. Attacks go through without getting detected. It's a deployment issue, not a Radware problem. We don't use it to its fullest capacity. Whenever there is an incident, it sometimes lacks the proper information about the attack, but most of the time, it's really reliable.
The time it takes to upload a site to the cloud is critical when under attack. If a site is down, a quick response to migrate the site to the cloud is essential. It currently takes about 15 to 20 minutes for the process to complete, which should be minimized.
General Manager at a wholesaler/distributor with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Nov 11, 2024
The product is good, but the company could improve its services by appointing customer success managers. This would ensure better interaction with customers and help resolve issues on both customer and supplier ends. Most other security product companies such as Palo Alto and Forcepoint appoint customer success managers to interact with customers and ensure that the product they have purchased is used perfectly. If we are facing any kind of issues in using the product or service, the customer success manager should get things right.
Director of Information Security at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
MSP
Top 10
May 28, 2024
The rise of generative AI and machine learning in cyberattacks demands more advanced defense strategies. In this context, I'm interested in how Radware plans to leverage these same technologies to improve its detection and response capabilities.
Security Operations Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Apr 24, 2024
We've been encountering a lack of updates in DefensePro. Currently, we're facing numerous bugs within our data solution. These bugs are impacting the failover process, and we're observing repeated crashes of the Elasticsearch container across various workflows. There's room for improvement in the clarity of the feedback provided by the command service in the CLI. Specifically, the messages it gives when something happens to Docker containers could be more informative. For example, it might simply state that container states have changed, or it might mention the directory paths where container data is saved, but these messages don't provide enough detail. To access the files, users currently need to navigate through a complex directory structure, which isn't very user-friendly. There is a need for more informative release notes. The current ones lack detail about what's included in the updates and what fixes have been implemented. This makes it difficult for users to understand the changes and how they might affect the experience.
EVP, Chief Digital officer and head of Cybersecurity at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5
Apr 16, 2024
Radware's management is very proactive, but Radware's lower-level staff is not proactive. You need to do a lot of follow-ups. This is one point that they need to improve. If they improve this, they will be world-class because everything else is so good.
Senior Executive Vice President at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5
Apr 9, 2024
As a service provider, we are expecting the multi-tenancy feature on the dashboard and reporting side. It will help share reports with customers in real-time. They can directly see them online. We are working with their team on API integration with our portal. We will be able to achieve that, but it will take some time.
Director of Research and Development at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5
Feb 9, 2024
Its documentation is not 100% clear, making it the weakest aspect of Radware. We have encountered some difficulties in understanding how to configure it correctly.
Radware DDoS provides robust multi-layer protection against distributed denial of service attacks, featuring real-time monitoring and anomaly detection. Its scalable cloud-based and on-site deployment options ensure effective safeguarding of critical infrastructure.Offering comprehensive defense, Radware DDoS includes features like data scrubbing, signature updates, and SSL-based mitigation. Integrated platforms and a user-friendly interface streamline its deployment. With advanced reporting,...
On the appliance, maybe the hardware could be improved. Most of Radware DDoS appliances are physical, so they could improve that aspect. In terms of the system and the functionality, Radware DDoS is constantly upgrading.
In Radware DDoS, everything is good as it is, but I think it can improve with more automation linked to the system. We have good real-time monitoring, and documentation is also helpful, but any integration with platforms such as Splunk would enhance it further. In terms of specific features missing in Radware DDoS, I would appreciate seeing an API Protector or similar capabilities that Akamai has. These allow for record creation on Akamai that Radware DDoS currently lacks.
Radware can improve in several specific areas. The downside is the marketing. Radware does not have the same presence as others, such as Cloudflare or Akamai. This is a key factor because many types of customers prefer other solutions due to marketing. In my experience, the cloud solution needs improvement. For example, Cloudflare is better in this aspect. This is the downside for Radware, but this is my opinion only. Marketing for the presence of different types of solutions is one area. Another is the cost. The different solutions for Radware DDoS are expensive. Better pricing is needed. The solution is very expensive, and a less expensive solution would be very beneficial because many people could acquire this solution and these products.
One downside of Radware DDoS is that the GUI should be more user-friendly. I have experience in other platforms as well, and what I see with Radware is that it is not as user-friendly as the other ones, so that is definitely one thing that needs improvement. Additionally, I do not have an option to open a new tab within the existing GUI. If I want to open something in a new tab and try to compare it with what I have on the previous page, I cannot do it. I also note that as far as I know, Radware DDoS does not have any authentication countermeasures to mitigate any attacks, which needs to be addressed. I know it has protections for SYN floods and all, but that should be changed. It should be more transparent where proper authentication should happen with the source. In my opinion, Radware DDoS's response times after an attack need to be improved. The response time is pretty bad sometimes. The SecOps dashboards for monitoring and reporting the metrics are pretty bad. That is where the comparison with NetScout is more applicable because the NetScout reporting is really good. I am referring to the mitigation reports or the forensic reports. It is very hard to get a scaled report in Radware, and even after a mitigation, putting out a report for that specific mitigation is a hard process. That definitely needs improvement. The aforementioned SecOps dashboards provide historical information on protected objects, networks, and so on, but when it is a sample report, it is not that accurate. As the scale goes bigger, the accuracy of the report also degrades. Radware has not helped me reduce the number of false positives I receive in response to an attack because, as I mentioned, I do not use Radware DDoS as a detection mechanism. I have other detection mechanisms, so I do not work with Radware regarding false positive reductions. That is handled on a separate platform itself, so it is not needed here.
There are areas where Radware DDoS could improve, specifically regarding centralized visibility. If someone is allowed access to one payment server but attempts to access the backend database and application servers from that source, we need to analyze the level of propagation. If they are performing suspicious activities such as random logins, it would be beneficial to have a centralized console that shows which IP is attempting which actions for greater visibility, enabling better analysis. To sum it up, we suggest that clear visibility within a management console could significantly enhance Radware DDoS's usability. We use Radware DDoS and Check Point for our public site because understanding the origin and pattern of public hits is crucial. If the console could segregate packets by type—such as HTTPS, logger, database-related queries, or other behavioral data—and generate reports accordingly, it would better aid our analysis.
There should be some extra layer of security and a method of advanced rate limiting. We can limit the number of IPs or URLs per session and per country. There should be improved bot management integration that mitigates bot-based DDoS attacks completely.
Their Cyber Security Controller portal, including its GUI and dashboard, could be more intuitive so CXOs can easily understand them. Improvements in visualization for reporting also need consideration. This feedback has already been provided directly to Radware DDoS Protection Service.
I want to improve the blocking time; it should be within 10 seconds because 18 seconds allows multiple transactions in the financial industry. I want the blocking time to be better than 18 seconds.
I think Radware DDoS Protection Service could be improved by enhancing the network analytics features.
I suggest improvements to the user interface to make it easier to use and to find the necessary data for analysis. Although the data is present, accessing it for analysis could be more simplified.
There's room for improvement in customization and integration. It would be better if routers and external firewalls could integrate with the solution. Additionally, when bugs are detected in a version during upgrades, there should be better communication about these bugs. They need to focus more on providing process documents highlighting bugs and their solutions. Sometimes there is leakage in the network. Attacks go through without getting detected. It's a deployment issue, not a Radware problem. We don't use it to its fullest capacity. Whenever there is an incident, it sometimes lacks the proper information about the attack, but most of the time, it's really reliable.
The time it takes to upload a site to the cloud is critical when under attack. If a site is down, a quick response to migrate the site to the cloud is essential. It currently takes about 15 to 20 minutes for the process to complete, which should be minimized.
The product is good, but the company could improve its services by appointing customer success managers. This would ensure better interaction with customers and help resolve issues on both customer and supplier ends. Most other security product companies such as Palo Alto and Forcepoint appoint customer success managers to interact with customers and ensure that the product they have purchased is used perfectly. If we are facing any kind of issues in using the product or service, the customer success manager should get things right.
The APSolute Vision feature needs improvement.
The rise of generative AI and machine learning in cyberattacks demands more advanced defense strategies. In this context, I'm interested in how Radware plans to leverage these same technologies to improve its detection and response capabilities.
To improve my ability to monitor security events, I would like Radware to strengthen its integration with SIEM for better logging capabilities.
We've been encountering a lack of updates in DefensePro. Currently, we're facing numerous bugs within our data solution. These bugs are impacting the failover process, and we're observing repeated crashes of the Elasticsearch container across various workflows. There's room for improvement in the clarity of the feedback provided by the command service in the CLI. Specifically, the messages it gives when something happens to Docker containers could be more informative. For example, it might simply state that container states have changed, or it might mention the directory paths where container data is saved, but these messages don't provide enough detail. To access the files, users currently need to navigate through a complex directory structure, which isn't very user-friendly. There is a need for more informative release notes. The current ones lack detail about what's included in the updates and what fixes have been implemented. This makes it difficult for users to understand the changes and how they might affect the experience.
Radware's management is very proactive, but Radware's lower-level staff is not proactive. You need to do a lot of follow-ups. This is one point that they need to improve. If they improve this, they will be world-class because everything else is so good.
As a service provider, we are expecting the multi-tenancy feature on the dashboard and reporting side. It will help share reports with customers in real-time. They can directly see them online. We are working with their team on API integration with our portal. We will be able to achieve that, but it will take some time.
Its documentation is not 100% clear, making it the weakest aspect of Radware. We have encountered some difficulties in understanding how to configure it correctly.
Radware DefenseFlow should add new features and algorithms to make it efficient.