AWS WAF vs. Barracuda Application Protection

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
AWS WAF
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
Amazon Web Services offers AWS WAF (web application firewall) to protect web applications from malicious behavior that might impede the applications functioning and performance, with customizable rules to prevent known harmful behaviors and an API for creating and deploying web security rules.
$0.60
per 1 million requests
Barracuda Application Protection
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Barracuda Application Protection is a cloud-delivered application security service that includes full-spectrum L3-L7 DDoS protection (volumetric and application) to protect applications from disruptions and ensure nonstop availability.N/A
Pricing
AWS WAFBarracuda Application Protection
Editions & Modules
Resource Type - Request
$0.60
per 1 million requests
Resource Type - Rule
$1.00
per month (prorated hourly)
Resource Type - Web ACL
$5.00
per month (prorated hourly)
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AWS WAFBarracuda Application Protection
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
AWS WAFBarracuda Application Protection
Considered Both Products
AWS WAF
Chose AWS WAF
When it comes to integration with AWS resources, we found that AWS WAF can easily integrate with CloudFront, API gateway, ALB, etc. When we analyzed other products, we found that the integration can be a little more difficult than just a click of a button. However, the pricing …
Chose AWS WAF
Easy of use. Setup and configuration is fairly quick. There are the usual advantages of it being a cloud solution where you can buy into the solution, configure it and set it up and get it up and running. If you are already a subscriber to AWS, having a native service has …
Chose AWS WAF
Comparatively, AWS WAF is far more prevalent in modern age web application as most of the High-Traffic E-commerce sites are moved on AWS. Due to this most developers are familiar with WAF, in addition its pretty easy comparatively as well. So other solutions may only come into …
Chose AWS WAF
There are a number of reasons to select AWS WAF. Most importantly, it easy to deploy. It helps programmers to protect against a wide range of vulnerabilities like injection attacks, DDoS, and many others from OWASP top 10. It allows us to set up rules and blocks any threats …
Chose AWS WAF
The integration with AWS services is pretty straight forward and provides a lot of functionalities other products don't. AWS Managed Rules can be used for easy setup with high protection options or Custom Rules can be created to costomize WAF to fit our needs.
Chose AWS WAF
Unlike these other AWS tools, WAF provides real-time traffic control, rules that can be customized according to the needs of the user, and is based on an implementation in the cloud which avoids the use of memory on computers as well as an account with a very affordable cost …
Chose AWS WAF
The use of this software was decided on because it is much easier to manage since the rules that are implemented can be specific or centralized. We also like it because you only pay for what you used.

Imperva SecureSphere requires a much higher learning curve.
Chose AWS WAF
We evaluated Imperva, but we were more convinced with AWS WAF because of the better pricing model, ease of deployment as we were already using the AWS platform which helping in ease of integration. The technical support for AWS WAF seemed to be better as they had better …
Barracuda Application Protection
Chose Barracuda Application Protection
-Easier to deploy
-Less costly
-Support is extraordinary
Chose Barracuda Application Protection
Price for the over all functionalities offered.
Simplicity to configure and deploy in our current environment.
Automated standard policies.
Chose Barracuda Application Protection
Using the phishing and impersonation tool to rule out and capture phishing emails is good one we are using.
Best Alternatives
AWS WAFBarracuda Application Protection
Small Businesses
Cloudflare
Cloudflare
Score 8.7 out of 10
Cloudflare
Cloudflare
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
Score 9.3 out of 10
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
Score 9.3 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
AWS WAFBarracuda Application Protection
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
8.5
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
AWS WAFBarracuda Application Protection
Likelihood to Recommend
AWS WAF is highly appropriate to interrupt or prevent cyber attacks because when implementing rules, whether they are specific or centralized, so any application that has these vulnerabilities is protected.
Implementing managed rules creates greater security to protect both API and applications. If implemented along with other AWS tools, the security is much better, so if you want to protect applications against more specific attacks, it is ideal to integrate with Amazon CloudFront, which is a great benefit because it warns when thresholds are exceeded or specific attacks occur. AWS WAF is ideal to avoid common web attacks. For more specific attacks and scenarios, I don't recommend this.
Read full review
Good in providing threat protection especially our emails that come in from the outside. Capturing potential spam and malware from emails from outside our network has been good. Keeps us alert for anything coming in from the outside that could compromise our network.
Read full review
Pros
  • AWS WAF has the most developer-friendly API to create firewall rules.
  • AWS WAF provides OWASP security controls, which reduces developers' burden (i.e., SQL injection and cross-site scripting).
  • AWS WAF has customizable web security rules. The user can even push the rules through the API available, which is the great feature and helped me a lot.
  • It protects applications at layer 7 (HTTP) of the OSI model and not just layer 4 (TCP).
Read full review
  • Automated policies
  • Easy to use
  • Identification of known attacks
  • Straight forward configuration
Read full review
Cons
  • The documentation offered is somewhat confusing, so it would be ideal if it were much more direct and precise.
  • Your initial configuration may be confusing, so the best option is to use the rule templates provided by AWS.
  • Its configuration is not unified with AWS, so it must be done separately and it takes some time.
  • The number of rules to be established is somewhat limited.
Read full review
  • More innovative solutions for sniffing more on the network.
  • Have the advanced ability to close off ports when they could be getting tested from hackers for intrusion.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
We have been using AWS WAF for the past 3 years in front of our websites. We find it useful in preventing data crawling, DDOS attacks, etc on our websites, and hence we are going to use it in the future as well. AWS WAF is one of the best Firewalls in business.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
The product is highly scalable. It is easy to configure the rules and thereby helps us to mitigate many vulnerabilities. The interface and programming of the firewall provisions were easy to setup. Amazon clearly spent a lot of time figuring this out and perfecting it. It allows users to do customized configurations based on their needs. It provides protection against a number of security issues like XSS, SQL injection, etc. I would definitely recommend this for protecting your infra as you scale, since this basically protects and filters all requests hitting your application server.
Read full review
-Easy to deploy -Easy to manage application -Scalability is good -Security Features contains a lot of granularities especially URL profiles protection and Json security
Read full review
Support Rating
If you're intending to use AWS WAF, I would say that you absolutely should sign up for support. AWS Support is excellent and they can help you in a really good way to solve your issues.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Easy of use. Setup and configuration is fairly quick. There are the usual advantages of it being a cloud solution where you can buy into the solution, configure it and set it up and get it up and running. If you are already a subscriber to AWS, having a native service has its advantages.
Read full review
Price for the over all functionalities offered. Simplicity to configure and deploy in our current environment. Automated standard policies. easy to maintain.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Somewhat costly if specific needs are not there.
  • If security is concerned than comparatively is beneficial.
  • All those price that spent on AWS WAF in return gets saved in man hours.
Read full review
  • Implementing Barracuda Application Protection has had a measurable and strategic impact on our overall business objectives. Within the first 6 months of deployment, I saw a 53% reduction in security incidents affecting the web applications, which directly translated into fewer service interruptions and less time spent on incident response
  • Cloud migration was so fast and give a head start and provides a competitive advantage in deploying new services faster than anticipated.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Barracuda Application Protection Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of