AWS WAF vs Castle

Overview

AWS WAF

Stacks164

Followers191

Votes0

Castle

Stacks47

Followers62

Votes0

AWS WAF vs Castle: What are the differences?

Deployment: One key difference between AWS WAF and Castle is the deployment method. AWS WAF is a cloud-native web application firewall service provided by Amazon Web Services, while Castle is a cloud-based security platform designed to protect user accounts and prevent fraud. AWS WAF is specifically focused on protecting web applications from common web exploits and allows users to create rules to filter out malicious traffic, while Castle focuses on authenticating users and preventing account takeover.
Features: Another difference is the primary features offered by both services. AWS WAF offers features such as customizable rules, integration with other AWS services, and monitoring of web traffic patterns to detect and mitigate attacks. On the other hand, Castle provides features like real-time fraud detection, behavior-based risk assessments, and user authentication through various methods like multi-factor authentication and biometric recognition.
Target Audience: The target audience for AWS WAF and Castle also differs. AWS WAF is typically used by developers, security engineers, and IT professionals who need to secure web applications hosted on AWS cloud infrastructure. In contrast, Castle caters to businesses that prioritize preventing fraud and protecting user accounts, making it suitable for businesses in industries like e-commerce, finance, and online services.
Scalability: In terms of scalability, AWS WAF is highly scalable and can handle large volumes of web traffic by leveraging AWS cloud infrastructure resources. Castle, on the other hand, focuses more on individual user account protection and fraud prevention, making it more suitable for businesses looking to secure user authentication and prevent fraudulent activities at a user account level.
Integration: When it comes to integration with other tools and services, AWS WAF seamlessly integrates with various AWS services like Amazon CloudFront, AWS Lambda, and Amazon API Gateway to provide a comprehensive web application security solution. Castle, on the other hand, integrates with popular platforms like Shopify, Stripe, and Segment to offer fraud prevention and user account security features tailored to specific industries or business needs.
Customization: Another key difference is the level of customization available in AWS WAF and Castle. AWS WAF allows users to create custom rules and configurations to suit their specific security requirements, while Castle offers a more out-of-the-box solution with predefined security measures and fraud detection algorithms that may be less customizable but easier to implement for businesses looking for a quick and effective security solution.

In Summary, AWS WAF and Castle differ in deployment methods, features, target audience, scalability, integration capabilities, and customization options.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

AWS WAF	Castle
AWS WAF is a web application firewall that helps protect your web applications from common web exploits that could affect application availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources.	Castle looks for suspicious login patterns without bothering the legitimate user nor the site administrator. The fully-automated anti-hijack engine identifies potential account compromises based on where the user logs in from and how they navigate the site.
-	Security Analytics; Threat Alerts; Login Notification Emails; Threat Segments; Adaptive Authentication
Statistics
Stacks 164	Stacks 47
Followers 191	Followers 62
Votes 0	Votes 0

What are some alternatives to AWS WAF, Castle?

Let's Encrypt

It is a free, automated, and open certificate authority brought to you by the non-profit Internet Security Research Group (ISRG).

Sqreen

Sqreen is a security platform that helps engineering team protect their web applications, API and micro-services in real-time. The solution installs with a simple application library and doesn't require engineering resources to operate. Security anomalies triggered are reported with technical context to help engineers fix the code. Ops team can assess the impact of attacks and monitor suspicious user accounts involved.

Instant 2FA

Add a powerful, simple and flexible 2FA verification view to your login flow, without making any DB changes and just 3 API calls.

ORY Hydra

It is a self-managed server that secures access to your applications and APIs with OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect. It is OpenID Connect Certified and optimized for latency, high throughput, and low resource consumption.

Virgil Security

Virgil consists of an open-source encryption library, which implements CMS and ECIES(including RSA schema), a Key Management API, and a cloud-based Key Management Service.

ExpeditedSSL

Stop pouring through MAN pages and outdated blog posts that don't take into account new requirements. With our add-on, you can go from install to confirmed installation in as little as twenty minutes: using nothing but your browser.

Clef

Clef is secure two-factor — built for consumers. Easy to use, integrate, and pay for.

Wazuh

It is a free, open source and enterprise-ready security monitoring solution for threat detection, integrity monitoring, incident response and compliance.

Detectify

Detectify is a web security service that simulates automated hacker attacks on your website, detecting critical security issues before real hackers do. We provide you with descriptive reports of the results so that you can continue to build safe products

SSLMate

SSLMate is the easiest way for developers and sysadmins to buy SSL certificates.

Related Comparisons

AWS WAF vs Castle: What are the differences?

Deployment: One key difference between AWS WAF and Castle is the deployment method. AWS WAF is a cloud-native web application firewall service provided by Amazon Web Services, while Castle is a cloud-based security platform designed to protect user accounts and prevent fraud. AWS WAF is specifically focused on protecting web applications from common web exploits and allows users to create rules to filter out malicious traffic, while Castle focuses on authenticating users and preventing account takeover.
Features: Another difference is the primary features offered by both services. AWS WAF offers features such as customizable rules, integration with other AWS services, and monitoring of web traffic patterns to detect and mitigate attacks. On the other hand, Castle provides features like real-time fraud detection, behavior-based risk assessments, and user authentication through various methods like multi-factor authentication and biometric recognition.
Target Audience: The target audience for AWS WAF and Castle also differs. AWS WAF is typically used by developers, security engineers, and IT professionals who need to secure web applications hosted on AWS cloud infrastructure. In contrast, Castle caters to businesses that prioritize preventing fraud and protecting user accounts, making it suitable for businesses in industries like e-commerce, finance, and online services.
Scalability: In terms of scalability, AWS WAF is highly scalable and can handle large volumes of web traffic by leveraging AWS cloud infrastructure resources. Castle, on the other hand, focuses more on individual user account protection and fraud prevention, making it more suitable for businesses looking to secure user authentication and prevent fraudulent activities at a user account level.
Integration: When it comes to integration with other tools and services, AWS WAF seamlessly integrates with various AWS services like Amazon CloudFront, AWS Lambda, and Amazon API Gateway to provide a comprehensive web application security solution. Castle, on the other hand, integrates with popular platforms like Shopify, Stripe, and Segment to offer fraud prevention and user account security features tailored to specific industries or business needs.
Customization: Another key difference is the level of customization available in AWS WAF and Castle. AWS WAF allows users to create custom rules and configurations to suit their specific security requirements, while Castle offers a more out-of-the-box solution with predefined security measures and fraud detection algorithms that may be less customizable but easier to implement for businesses looking for a quick and effective security solution.

In Summary, AWS WAF and Castle differ in deployment methods, features, target audience, scalability, integration capabilities, and customization options.

AWS WAF vs Castle

Overview