AWS WAF vs Zscaler

Overview

AWS WAF

Stacks164

Followers191

Votes0

Zscaler

Stacks40

Followers80

Votes0

AWS WAF vs Zscaler: What are the differences?

Introduction

AWS WAF and Zscaler are two popular web application firewall (WAF) solutions used to protect web applications and APIs from various cyber threats. While both aim to enhance the security of web assets, they have key differences that set them apart.

Cloud-based vs. On-premises: AWS WAF is a cloud-based solution provided by Amazon Web Services, allowing customers to deploy and manage their web application firewall in the AWS cloud. On the other hand, Zscaler is an on-premises WAF solution that requires physical hardware deployment in the customer's own infrastructure.
Scalability and elasticity: With AWS WAF, customers can easily scale their security infrastructure horizontally and vertically by leveraging the elasticity of the AWS cloud. This means that as web traffic increases or decreases, AWS WAF can dynamically adjust resources to handle the load effectively. Zscaler, being an on-premises solution, may have limitations in terms of scalability, as it depends on the capacity of the physical hardware.
Integration and compatibility: AWS WAF is tightly integrated with other AWS services, such as AWS CloudFront and Application Load Balancer, which makes it seamless to configure and manage WAF rules. Zscaler, being on-premises, may require additional effort for integration with other cloud services or infrastructure components.
Network architecture: AWS WAF operates in a decentralized manner, with deployment options across multiple AWS regions globally. This allows the WAF to have minimal latency and higher availability. Zscaler, being an on-premises solution, relies on the customer's network architecture and may have limitations in terms of geographic coverage and latency.
Rule customization and flexibility: AWS WAF provides customers with fine-grained control over web traffic by allowing them to create custom rules using OWASP Core Rule Set (CRS) or develop their own AWS WAF rules. Zscaler also offers rule customization but may have limitations compared to the flexibility provided by AWS WAF.
Cost model: AWS WAF follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where customers only pay for the resources they consume. This allows for flexibility and cost optimization. Zscaler, being an on-premises solution, may involve upfront hardware costs, ongoing maintenance, and potentially higher operational costs.

In Summary, AWS WAF and Zscaler differ in terms of deployment model (cloud-based vs. on-premises), scalability, integration, network architecture, rule customization, and cost model.

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	Zscaler
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.	It is a global cloud-based information security company that provides Internet security, web security, firewalls, sandboxing, SSL inspection, antivirus, vulnerability management and granular control of user activity in cloud computing, mobile and Internet of things environments.
-	Internet security; Web security; Firewalls; Sandboxing; SSL inspection; Antivirus; Vulnerability management
Statistics
Stacks 164	Stacks 40
Followers 191	Followers 80
Votes 0	Votes 0

What are some alternatives to AWS WAF, Zscaler?

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 Zscaler: What are the differences?

Introduction

Cloud-based vs. On-premises: AWS WAF is a cloud-based solution provided by Amazon Web Services, allowing customers to deploy and manage their web application firewall in the AWS cloud. On the other hand, Zscaler is an on-premises WAF solution that requires physical hardware deployment in the customer's own infrastructure.
Scalability and elasticity: With AWS WAF, customers can easily scale their security infrastructure horizontally and vertically by leveraging the elasticity of the AWS cloud. This means that as web traffic increases or decreases, AWS WAF can dynamically adjust resources to handle the load effectively. Zscaler, being an on-premises solution, may have limitations in terms of scalability, as it depends on the capacity of the physical hardware.
Integration and compatibility: AWS WAF is tightly integrated with other AWS services, such as AWS CloudFront and Application Load Balancer, which makes it seamless to configure and manage WAF rules. Zscaler, being on-premises, may require additional effort for integration with other cloud services or infrastructure components.
Network architecture: AWS WAF operates in a decentralized manner, with deployment options across multiple AWS regions globally. This allows the WAF to have minimal latency and higher availability. Zscaler, being an on-premises solution, relies on the customer's network architecture and may have limitations in terms of geographic coverage and latency.
Rule customization and flexibility: AWS WAF provides customers with fine-grained control over web traffic by allowing them to create custom rules using OWASP Core Rule Set (CRS) or develop their own AWS WAF rules. Zscaler also offers rule customization but may have limitations compared to the flexibility provided by AWS WAF.
Cost model: AWS WAF follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where customers only pay for the resources they consume. This allows for flexibility and cost optimization. Zscaler, being an on-premises solution, may involve upfront hardware costs, ongoing maintenance, and potentially higher operational costs.

In Summary, AWS WAF and Zscaler differ in terms of deployment model (cloud-based vs. on-premises), scalability, integration, network architecture, rule customization, and cost model.

AWS WAF vs Zscaler

Overview

AWS WAF vs Zscaler: What are the differences?