Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling helps users maintain application availability and allows users to automatically add or remove EC2 instances according to definable conditions.
F5 Distributed Cloud WAF leverages F5's Advanced WAF technology, delivering WAF-as-a-Service and combining signature- and behavior-based protection for web applications. It acts as an intermediate proxy to inspect application requests and responses to block and mitigate a broad spectrum of risks stemming from the OW ASP Top 10, persistent and coordinated threat campaigns, bots, and layer 7 DoS.
The operating system, CPU, RAM, and storage may be constructed in any configuration and readily altered after the build. The most important factor is the "sense of security."Problems may arise once every several years, but there is a significant difference when discussing how …
On the servers with fixed resources, Microsoft IIS was installed. In terms of storage capacity, the server has a predetermined limit. It's possible to run out of money before the next billing cycle begins. A higher price tag or more resources may be necessary to ensure …
The main reason is our total infra is created on AWS and we tend to use the natural service by AWS rather than third party tools, which has more advantages when the auto scaling interacts with other AWS services and its way easy to configure when we compare it with counter …
There are no reasonable alternatives to consider when you're building a highly available application of EC2 instances in AWS. There are alternative high availability architectures to consider, including but not limited Elastic Kubernetes Service or serverless architectures. In …
The Oracle Compute Instance Auto scaling features works very similar to the AWS once. However, the AWS EC2 Auto scaling feature has many more config parameters to it.
1 year ago, without auto scaling, every time we think we might have a peak in demand, we launch a new server manually. So far we did not buy it but sometimes the server was not used at all or we forgot to remove from load balancer. Cost was affected a little bit but human …
We tried with dedicated hardware load balancers with two servers a few years ago. It was a huge investment, and involves a lot of work, mainly on the server side. Also, that was not elastic. So if we wanted to go from 2 to 3 servers, we need to buy another server. That works, …
In my previous company we used Akamai WAF. I know that in my previous company with usage of Akamai there were some issues, but as far as technically how they compare, I couldn't really tell you.
This plaform has advanced threat detection technology and mitigation of this tool is also great that's why why it helps us in securing from many attacks including damages from 7 attcks, BOTS Mitigations and DDoS Protection. Also this plaform has customised security management …
F5 Distributed Cloud WAF allowed us to protect internal applications without public exposure, edge routing, or cloud dependency. We gained robust protection without exposing internal systems to the internet and F5 gave us the flexibility, security, and control we needed for a …
When comparing F5 Distributed Cloud WAF, Akamai, Cloudflare, and Fastly, Fastly generally stands out for its raw speed and focus on developer-friendly features, while Cloudflare is often considered the best balance of speed, security, and ease of use, making it a popular choice …
[Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling] is simple to set up and pretty self-explanatory. Never had issues around scaling up or down. [Now] we won't need to guess the capacity for our apps or services. The both scaling, up and down is simply perfect, you can actually stop checking every time for resources because this tool takes care of everything
It is doing its job effectively, and its scalability is superb. So, if you have a mixed environment with cloud and on-premise systems to protect this product, provide a solution to the challenge. However, its management is more suited to DevOps teams rather than to the ones responsible for on-premise systems, making the management a bit more complex.
Layer seven attacks are becoming far more common. Traditionally it was always layered three, layer four, where you get an additional firewall, but with the application layer attacks become more frequent, more popular, et cetera. So having the web application firewall protecting us, and then with the recent Log4j, that's the most recent use case when it gave us that instant level of protection whilst we remediated the Log4j that we had that and the F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was protecting us.
I have a great relationship with the account manager, my account manager, and I think he drives the best price possible, um, for me, and I'm happy with that price.
F5 Distributed Cloud WAF is always innovating and evolving.
We run a very competitive proof value where we run numerous competitors against each other, and then we evaluate from that and then make the selection, and F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was the winner.
Fail over between devices feels unstable if there are thousands of objects attached to the traffic-group. Needs to be more simpler.
We have seen issues with malicious user detection where we have used open protocols due to legacy applications, and have been caught with legitimate traffic being blocked.
I would continue using F5 Distributed Cloud WAF because I am highly satisfied with its robust and comprehensive features that effectively protect our applications from evolving cyber threats. The advanced AI capabilities enhance threat detection and response, providing proactive security. Additionally, the excellent customer support ensures quick resolution of any issues, making the overall experience reliable and efficient. Trust in the manufacturer’s innovation and continuous updates further motivates me to keep this solution as a core part of our security infrastructure.
Usability is good since we already know how AWS works. For those that are new it might be a little bit confusing at the beginning but they are improving it at a fast pace. Even though AWS keeps changing the user interface constantly, it is still powerful, understandable and easy to use. For technical people, they still offer the CLI.
I believe is a solution that was designed from the start to be simple and easy to use. Coming from Imperva, it simply eased the burden and complexity of managing and securing our apps on different environments (cloud and on-prem). It easy to scale and very quick to deploy (as a cloud waf should be), provide us with DevOps integrations, visibility and automatic insights from multiple events that guarantee peace of mind for us analysts and opp managers.
The platform works as is. The help and tutorials on the help page can help you to setup the entire platform without problems, and also provides help on a huge variety of problems. Amazon also provides support plans. We have the basic support plan, but Amazon offers three support tiers, and we know that it works perfect.
The operating system, CPU, RAM, and storage may be constructed in any configuration and readily altered after the build. The most important factor is the "sense of security."Problems may arise once every several years, but there is a significant difference when discussing how to cope with hardware problems in the local age.
This plaform has advanced threat detection technology and mitigation of this tool is also great that's why why it helps us in securing from many attacks including damages from 7 attcks, BOTS Mitigations and DDoS Protection. Also this plaform has customised security management policy to tailor security measures according to our specific needs.
We will devote more time to development than server administration, but we will require additional time if you migrate from another ecosystem.
Fault detection and reporting are automated in the old server, and bandwidth is fixed per month, but everything is manageable automatically. We only pay for the resources we use.
After some months, we met our return on investment (ROI).