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.

The AOF solution is used for any customer with applications to protect them. It provides security features to protect the application from threats such as SQL injections and challenges of the browser using AI.

The AOF solution provides numerous security features. It protects applications from various threats, including SQL injection, and ensures that the application behavior is from a human, not a bot. It includes DDoS protection which has been enhanced after migrating from SDM.

The solution is very effective as it includes security features important for financial applications where protection is necessary to avoid potential financial loss or penalties. It helps protect the core and backend of applications.

One improvement for AOF could be focusing on enhancing its AI engine to make it more mature.

I have used the solution for almost two years.

F5 is very good in terms of stability with no issues reported during maintenance.

F5 scalability is excellent. I have not experienced any issues with scalability.

F5 customer support is good but not as excellent as Infoblox support due to complexity issues. I would rate F5 customer support as seven out of ten.

I recommend Infoblox because it's a leader in DNS security with more than 15 customers using it. It is very flexible in configuration, support, and scalability compared to F5.

The initial setup involves sending a request, understanding requirements such as policy and application number, and ensuring prerequisites are ready. It uses policy virtual servers and the network WAF, taking about five or six days to implement.

The ROI is very impressive as it is crucial for financial applications to be protected efficiently. Ensuring application security is a significant milestone, crucial to prevent financial losses or penalties.

The setup cost is normal, yet not the best in terms of the commercial aspect. Other competitors like Fortinet are cheaper than F5.

Fortinet and its FortiWeb product are competitors to F5. Fortinet has many products yet lacks concentration on a single part, unlike F5.

For enterprises in the financial sector, having F5 is essential. I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.

F5 Advanced WAF is used for the protection of applications from current web threats, including DDoS attacks. It provides a comprehensive security solution that incorporates different protection levels.

The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its extensive set of capabilities for application protection, including DDoS prevention, and its ability to work with Pentesters and external scanners to observe user activity and eliminate false positives. This comprehensive approach to application security enables an organization to protect its web applications from diverse web threats effectively.

All features of Advanced WAF offer numerous functions, which means tuning configuration is not simple. It's a powerful tool yet can be complex for new users. Future updates should ensure not to break the current state, as users are concerned the new version may not meet current standards.

I have been using F5 Advanced WAF for more than ten years.

F5 Advanced WAF is considered a stable product, and I would rate it as ten out of ten in terms of stability.

The solution's scalability is solid, with the option to increase capabilities through licensing and adding modules in the virtual edition. However, it requires additional expenses, so I would rate it as a seven or eight out of ten.

F5 provides one of the best technical supports, though there have been a few cases where customers were dissatisfied due to response speed. However, in general, their support is highly efficient and knowledgeable.

In the past, Imperva was the leading solution, however, now F5 is preferred as it offers a superior solution according to customer feedback.

Deploying the solution, including initial configuration, licensing, addressing, and enabling WAF, could take one to three hours. However, for a comprehensive setup, considering external factors and optimizations, the process could take up to a month.

I handle installations and other related aspects by myself, without any additional help.

There are numerous benefits for end customers, as a secure application helps prevent potential breaches and ensures the safety of customers' data, especially in sensitive sectors like banking.

F5 Advanced WAF is not cheap. That said, it offers numerous features and is known as one of the best solutions in its segment. It provides significant value by offering comprehensive protection for high-stakes environments.

I work with other vendors, such as Broadcom, Qualys, BeyondTrust, and Trend Micro, depending on the customer's needs and the vision of my company.

I would fully recommend F5 Advanced WAF for its feature-rich offerings and high detection rate of threats. I rate it a ten out of ten as it is one of the best solutions available.

Our clients mostly have their own applications, such as banking apps, and use F5 Advanced WAF to avoid vulnerabilities and threats on both the application layer and transport layer.

We create web policies for their apps and configure ASM signatures to prevent vulnerabilities. After configuring the policies, I monitor logs continuously to block vulnerability attacks and assist clients in addressing any issues.

One of the things that surprised me the most about F5 devices is their compatibility with the existing infrastructure of most customers. They can be easily integrated between the main firewall and back end servers, making it a seamless addition to enhance security.

The traffic learning feature stands out as the most valuable. When an app is accessed, the log generated in F5 Advanced WAF provides suggestions on what actions to take. This feature is particularly beneficial in new vulnerability scenarios, offering guidance based on learned data.

Additionally, I appreciate the way F5 Advanced WAF builds policies by configuring a basic policy and queuing it in learning mode. The solution learns from logs, and based on that learning, I configure ASM signatures.

The GUI interface can be confusing due to similar-looking tabs for policy building, traffic learning, and event logs. A more explanatory GUI would be beneficial. However, F5 solutions are a bit expensive compared to others, although they provide the best service and options.

I have been working with F5 Advanced WAF for around six months.

The solution is very stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

F5 Advanced WAF is very scalable, and I would rate its scalability as nine out of ten.

F5 support is excellent and deserves a ten out of ten. Their technical support is responsive and helpful, making the overall experience very satisfactory.

I have not worked with many other vendors as extensively as F5, but I have some knowledge of FortiWAF. FortiWAF has fewer options compared to F5, particularly in features like iRULES, which offers more flexibility for traffic management and coding.

The initial setup is not very lengthy. Once the device is on-premises, configuring and managing it is quite efficient, though the entire project from start to end may take about a month to a month and a half.

I work with a team of five to six network engineers across different cities, providing support and collaboration for client deployments.

The return on investment is quite high with F5 solutions. Customers prefer F5 for their superior service and features, despite the higher cost.

F5 is on the expensive side but offers superior solutions and options. Customers are willing to pay for the quality and features provided.

I have some knowledge of FortiWAF, but F5 provides more options, especially with features like iRULES for managing traffic.

I would recommend F5 Advanced WAF to other users. It provides excellent features, flexibility, and support.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We use F5 Advanced WAF to protect web applications on HTTPS, APIs, and portals.

F5 Advanced WAF helps our engineers to learn the complete configuration, including fundamental and advanced policies.

Most customers encounter stability issues with the product's Big-IP logs. It works slowly while retrieving logs.

We have been using F5 Advanced WAF since this year.

The product is more stable than Fortinet.

The product has modular appliances. It works well, scalability-wise.

The technical support services are good. The team includes professional engineers to communicate with the customers regarding cases.

It is easy to set up F5 Advanced WAF. Although, it is difficult to deploy and maintain compared to Fortinet. The deployment process involves gathering customer information regarding virtual servers to be protected. Later, we select the best design suitable for their requirements and start with license provisioning. Further, we configure LTM with special servers and nodes and proceed with configuring the security policy and advanced directory. It takes a week to protect the infrastructure fully. Once we have license provisioning, it is good to run.

F5 Advanced WAF's pricing is high. Fortinet and some other vendors are more affordable.

F5 Advanced WAF has good capabilities, powerful tools, and professional services. I advise others to compare pricing with vendors in terms of their use cases before purchasing the product.

I rate it a ten out of ten.