F5 Advanced WAF with LTM, IPI, and Threat Campaigns (PAYG, 3Gbps)

Our primary use cases for F5 Advanced WAF  in our system include F5 LTM, F5 WAF , and F5 DNS GTM for one of our applications.

The features of F5 Advanced WAF  that I find most valuable include advanced WAF  capabilities, bot detection, DDoS features, and all the top ten attacks we have configured with the WAF.

Machine learning and automated threat detection features have helped our security strategy because we initially used them during our application learning mode. It provides us with one hundred percent accurate application learning to reduce false positives, and it has been very helpful.

In terms of additional features I would like to see from them in the future, I think the GTM is a bit complicated to configure, which I observed. Otherwise, LTM and WAF are straightforward. I faced problems during the GTM configuration. The LTM and ASM are very simple to configure and manage. There is excellent clarity in the LTM and the WAF. Whenever something goes wrong or we have to whitelist anything, it clearly indicates where to go and where I have to make modifications. It is very simple and we get comprehensive information.

I have been working with this solution for three to four years.

My experience with the technical support from F5 is that on the technical side, we sometimes face issues with reachability and availability. Regarding technical support overall, I am not completely satisfied with F5. We are facing problems. I would rate the technical support at five out of ten.

Both response time and availability need to be improved. Technical skill on the support side also needs improvement.

I switched from Radware to F5 Advanced WAF after COVID, which was two to three years ago.

Overall, I believe it has been a good decision to switch because I do not think any other product available on the market can compete with F5 at this time.

The initial setup of F5 Advanced WAF is very straightforward.

Regarding the price, I think the cost is a bit higher compared to others. Earlier we were using Radware, and compared to Radware, it is very high. However, it is providing more features than Radware. The WAF side is very familiar and we can easily understand it. It is not complicated, and the features are at a very granular level compared to Radware and other WAF solutions.

To assess the effectiveness of DDoS mitigation in F5 Advanced WAF, we checked internally using JMeter , on which we wrote a script and tried multiple users at the same time. The DDoS feature blocked all that traffic according to our threshold. We tested this internally.

The ability to enforce granular policy adjustments has helped my organization with compliance adherence because in the last three to four months, we put our application in blocking mode. We have not configured granular level settings; we have configured at a high level currently. Going forward, we will be planning to add additional security in the WAF.

I have not used advanced analytics and traffic insights features. I also have not used vulnerability management features, as we have different solutions for that.

From my perspective, whatever we have used of F5 Advanced WAF, I do not think it needs improvement because I am currently satisfied with the features provided. We just need to work more on the WAF. If there is anything that needs attention, we will definitely let you know.

Currently, ten to twelve people are using it in my company. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I am working with an integration and security company that collaborates with various vendors. I am currently dealing with F5 Advanced WAF .

The whole mechanism of F5 Advanced WAF  is effective. It contains the logic of both negative and positive security combined, providing added value to the company I work with to protect their applications.

I do not have anything in mind right now that needs improvement. Generally, it works well. If we need any specific feature, we approach F5 directly.

I have probably used it for ten years or so.

I do not need them much because my team is professional. If there is a bug, the support is usually understanding and resolves issues.

The price is affordable and satisfactory.

One of the best features is the bot protection capabilities. I rate the product eight out of ten.

I use F5 Advanced WAF  to manage enterprise clients, focusing on licensing and support flexibility to accommodate various customer segments, including enterprises and mid-market customers.

F5 Advanced WAF  provides two different licensing models. The subscription-based model offers competitive pricing, making it easier for me to see ROI. However, the perpetual license, despite an initial higher cost, lacks transparency regarding support expiration. Due to the subscription, I can compare it with other tools, but as a perpetual buyer, I am unaware of support expiration until after the purchase, allowing indicative ROI calculations but not actual ones.

Furthermore, F5 Advanced WAF  offers features not available in other products, though I suggest consulting a technical expert for specific features.

F5 Advanced WAF  sells perpetual licenses as perpetual assets during sales without informing me that support ends after a few years. I find out later and am required to pay for support without receiving updated versions. Deployment training for F5 Advanced WAF is lacking and restricts growth by being inaccessible and costly for partners.

I provide the feedback based on my recent experience and judgment.

I have interacted with F5's support, and while I have no major complaints, they could improve. I rate them eight out of ten.

Deployment is easy for me, but enablement training is not easily available, accessible, or sufficiently supported.

I find it difficult to compute ROI for perpetual licenses due to the lack of upfront information about support expiry. Subscription models offer clearer ROI due to a more competitive pricing scheme.

Subscription models have competitive pricing, while perpetual licenses involve an upfront higher cost, leading to ambiguity regarding support cessation.

Additional costs for deployment and training further impact my cost considerations.

I am interested in how F5 Advanced WAF features and pricing compare to alternatives like Fortinet and Check Point.

I rate F5 Advanced WAF eight out of ten.

Despite a few issues, F5 Advanced WAF is performing well for me. Improving engagement and enablement for partners would enhance its value to GSI partners and service providers.

Overall, I see potential positive development for the product.