Apache HTTP Server vs. F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache HTTP Server
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Apache Web Server (Apache HTTP Server) is an open source HTTP web server for modern operating systems including UNIX and Windows.N/A
F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
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.N/A
Pricing
Apache HTTP ServerF5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache HTTP ServerF5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache HTTP ServerF5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Considered Both Products
Apache HTTP Server
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache HTTP Server has more stability and features than the other products. It is also more secure. Apache HTTP Server has a more developer base so it is easier to find resources on it.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
I has a lot more features, except that IIS is more integrated in a Windows environment. But now with .net core also possible from Apache it would work anywhere really. Only in a full Windows environment where full integration is needed I would chose to go for IIS. Otherwise …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
IIS has a clear advantage over Apache: Configuration can be done through a convenient visual editor. But, sometimes, IIS can be tricky to use for serving other things than asp.net. We had bad experiences working at scale with IIS7.5 while serving PHP websites. I know that more …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
The comparison with other products from IBM or Oracle is difficult. These are mostly software that has to be paid for. The only fair comparison at eye level is probably the Nginx web server: It is also free and offers even higher performance. In the meantime, there is also a …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache is more simple, also it tends to be more stable and it is less complicated to use, comparing with other complex solutions that are difficult to troubleshot.
So wherever possible I select Apache HTTP Server for own/enterprise use also advise consumers to select the Apache …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
By having a similar purpose, which is to publish and manage access to services, sites, and/or web systems, I have had to implement them to analyze their qualities and virtues, but stability, the power of implementation of different solutions and to be able to expand through own …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache lacks the scalability and feature set of NGINX but our team was not only far more experienced with Apache HTTP Server but was relying on tools and frameworks that required Apache HTTP Server. We've recently considered moving to NGINX but the workload to migrate and train …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Oracle WebLogic /Tuxedo is great when you are using it to install Oracle stack on top including other Oracle middleware and applications. Similarly, if you have IBM applications that need to be configured with IBM DB2, IBM WebSphere is better than Apache Web Server. Red Hat …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
To be quite honest I often select Apache because it is the world's most commonly used web server and I have been using it for more than 20 years across many organizations. I have never been burned using Apache. Apache rises above IIS in functionality, configurability, and the …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Against Nginx: Mainly- it's been in the field the longest. There's not really a reason to move to Nginx on it's own. Apache has a mountain of documentation and how-tos that extend from the Foundation itself, to Individual Developers, spanning over 20 years, and most of it …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
We chose Apache because it handles dynamic content better than Nginx and it's very well supported. Nginx does handle high traffic sites better, but most of our sites do not get thousands of visitors or more a day as we are a small company serving niche markets. It is notable …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache Web Server is the oldest among all of these above-mentioned web server solutions provide a wider range of tools and support available which is of great help when creating a web app because less investment of time and money is what contributes to the success of a project …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
I have loved Apache and the brief experience I had with IIS wasn't as good. Nginx I have heard good things and though we use it heavily for our servers now without problems, I haven't configured it myself.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache is often used in conjunction with Nginx, with Nginx in front of Apache to serve static assets like CSS and JS. Both are easy to configure. IIS is pretty cumbersome and is not as flexible as Apache.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
  • Add EAR files to Apache Web Server
  • Keep portability. Web Server machine provides an option to the person to complete their own updates along with deploy their unique application. If live mirroring is not used, some users will have to wait for renewed content. More servers equals …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache is far superior to Microsoft's IIS. The only reason to consider IIS would be for compatibility with a given software package that is made exclusively for IIS.
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Both NGinx and Apache are trying to accomplish the same thing, with the exception that NGinx is a much faster product. It allows for multi-threading which spreads out the traffic around the server. Apache is typically enabled by default and due to the high volume of websites …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
I've used Microsoft's IIS and IBM's HTTP server. The major and a clear advantage of Apache web server over these products is that it’s free and has no licensing issues. Being in the industry for quite sometime (oldest web server) a lot of products and customizations have been …
Chose Apache HTTP Server
Apache is terrific. Zeus is actually built on Apache and adds a mediocre at best interface to controlling it. IIS is only good on Windows. Netscape servers are probably not even around anymore, but when they were, were the absolute worst. I couldn't move my office off of them …
F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Imperva Application Firewall
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Do not change IP for DNS distribution to zones around the world
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
waf de azure, pero El waf de azure es mas para empresas pequenas,

Azure WAF, but Azure WAF is more for small businesses
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
F5 Distributed Cloud API Security
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
CoreSecurity
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM)
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
good product road map catering to industry needs and requirements
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Azure CDN and Palo Alto Networks Advanced URL Filtering
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
for continuty capacity and funcionality
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
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.
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
I have not evaluated any other product like this.
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
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 …
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
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 …
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
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 …
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
I could not find fortiwaf in the list. We have to bypass frequently.
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Better WAF protection
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
F5 BIG-IP DNS
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Akamai
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Ease of use. Cost. Features ability to use managed service, in cloud provider and on prem.
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Akamai, Sophos Cloud Optix and Azure Analysis Services
Chose F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
It's comparable to other products like NetScaler and Silverpeak but was easier to implement.
Best Alternatives
Apache HTTP ServerF5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Small Businesses
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Cloudflare
Cloudflare
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache HTTP ServerF5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
8.9
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
9.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache HTTP ServerF5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)
Likelihood to Recommend
Well Suited: Perfect for hosting your own website. And, I don't mean just an individual with a port of MySpace. I mean an industrial strength, commercial grade replacement for Microsoft IIS. If you need a web server that provides a feature-rich environment with support for multiple sites (hosted in the same server), with such features as virtual hosting, and modular feature design, than Apache Web Server is right on the money. Less Well-Suited: Single page, small feature-set websites. Apache is a lot of trouble for developers to set up, just to send/receive JSON strings of a few bytes. You're really better off using something smaller and faster/simpler (lighttpd for example).
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Pros
  • Apache is Open Source, governed well (the foundation) and probably the most stable computing platform ever.
  • Apache is probably one of the most customizable and configurable pieces of software that I have ever run across in more than 30 years of development.
  • If there is something that Apache can not do, then you need to ask yourself; should I be doing that? The point here is that it is a solid solution and seems to only integrate other technologies that are of the highest caliber.
  • Apache will live forever and you can not go wrong with it.
Read full review
  • 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.
Read full review
Cons
  • Configuration files are located on different places depending on your Linux distro.
  • If you have an error on one configuration file, apache refuses to start and sometimes is difficult to know why.
  • Security is not great by default, but making a todo list help when you configure a new server.
Read full review
  • Better integration between different F5 solutions
  • 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.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
Seems no issue
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
Unnoticed slowness
Read full review
Support Rating
I give this rating because there is so much Apache documentation and information on the web that you can literally do anything. This has to do with the fact that there is a huge Open Source community that is beyond mature and perhaps one of the most helpful to be found. The only thing that should hold anyone back from anything is that they can not read. RTFM, my friend. And I must say that the manual is excellent.
Read full review
I never contacted support for this product.
Read full review
Online Training
No answers on this topic
Online training saves me lots of time
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
Just make sure you origin servers have F5 IPs allowed.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
The comparison with other products from IBM or Oracle is difficult. These are mostly software that has to be paid for. The only fair comparison at eye level is probably the NGINX web server: It is also free and offers even higher performance. In the meantime, there is also a paid Plus version of NGINX. This has extended support and special functions.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
Dont see any issue so far
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Apache web server helped us in building client applications without much investment in the underlying server configuration which gives us the ability to start on a new project quickly and upgrade its resources as and when needed.
  • Using software which is well-supported by a community of open source contributors makes tasks easy and affordable when need help since a couple of minutes on Google saves a couple of dollars every time and you don't need a specialized support person unless there is something significant needing to be changed.
Read full review
  • This helps us quickly push out applications and security to our applications. It is so simple to perform these tasks in F5 Distributed Cloud WAF.
  • We are also using the MSP side of it so we have support and are able to have F5 manage our solutions that can save us time.
Read full review
ScreenShots

F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall) Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of