CDNetworks Application Shield vs Kong Gateway WAF
CDNetworks Application Shield and Kong Gateway WAF take different approaches to web application security. Consider your team's expertise and infrastructure preferences when evaluating these options.
CDNetworks Application Shield and Kong Gateway WAF take fundamentally different approaches to web application security. Understanding your infrastructure and team capabilities will help determine which approach fits your needs.
Overview
CDNetworks Application Shield and Kong Gateway WAF are both popular web application firewall solutions. This comparison will help you understand the key differences and choose the right one for your needs.
Cloud-based WAF integrated with CDNetworks' global CDN, offering signature-based threat detection, DDoS protection, and bot management across 1,500+ points of presence worldwide.
API gateway with built-in WAF plugin for enterprise customers. Kong is the most popular open source API gateway (35K+ GitHub stars, 312M+ downloads) built on NGINX, processing 400B+ API calls daily. The WAF plugin is an Enterprise-only add-on that protects API endpoints at the gateway layer.
Quick Comparison
| Feature | CDNetworks Application Shield | Kong Gateway WAF |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Rating | 3.7/5 | 3.8/5 |
| Free Tier | No | No |
| Pricing Model | Custom pricing, usage-based | Tiered (Plus per-gateway + Enterprise custom) |
| Ease of Use | 3.5/5 | 3.2/5 |
| Value for Money | 3.5/5 | 3.0/5 |
| Support | 3.8/5 | 4.2/5 |
| Platforms | Any web application, cloud-hosted sites, on-premises origins | Linux (Ubuntu, RHEL, Debian, Amazon Linux, Alpine), Docker, Kubernetes (via Ingress Controller and Operator), AWS, Azure, GCP, ARM64, macOS (dev) |
| Compliance | PCI DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2 | SOC 2 Type II, FIPS 140-2 (Enterprise data planes), supports PCI DSS and HIPAA compliance |
Pricing Comparison
CDNetworks Application Shield
Model: Custom pricing, usage-based
Application Shield Standard
Custom pricing
Application Shield Advanced
Custom pricing
Kong Gateway WAF
Model: Tiered (Plus per-gateway + Enterprise custom)
Kong Gateway OSS
Free
Kong Konnect Plus
From $225/mo
Kong Konnect Enterprise
Custom (annual)
Dedicated Cloud Gateway
$500/mo per control plane + $0.15/GB
Features Comparison
CDNetworks Application Shield
-
Edge-Based WAF
WAF filtering at 1,500+ global edge locations for low-latency protection close to end users.
-
DDoS Protection
Multi-layer DDoS mitigation covering network (L3/L4) and application (L7) layer attacks.
-
Bot Management
Identify and manage automated traffic including scrapers, credential stuffers, and inventory hoarders.
-
API Protection
Secure APIs against abuse, injection attacks, and unauthorized access with dedicated API security rules.
-
Virtual Patching
Quickly mitigate known vulnerabilities without modifying application code.
-
Real-Time Analytics
Comprehensive dashboards showing attack trends, blocked requests, and traffic patterns.
Kong Gateway WAF
-
Gateway-Embedded WAF
WAF runs as a plugin inside the Kong Gateway process, inspecting API traffic at the same layer where routing, authentication, and rate limiting occur. No separate WAF appliance or additional proxy hop needed.
-
OWASP Top 10 Protection
Built-in protection against common web application attacks including SQL injection, cross-site scripting, command injection, and path traversal at the API gateway layer.
-
Plugin Ecosystem
Over 100 plugins for security, traffic control, authentication, and observability. WAF works alongside bot detection, IP restriction, CORS, ACL, and rate limiting plugins in a configurable execution chain.
-
Third-Party WAF Integrations
Open plugin architecture supports third-party WAF engines including open-appsec (ML-driven detection) and Wallarm (API security). Teams can choose the WAF engine that fits their threat model.
-
Kubernetes-Native Deployment
Kong Ingress Controller and Kong Kubernetes Operator provide native Kubernetes integration. WAF policies can be managed declaratively through Kubernetes CRDs alongside gateway configuration.
-
Hybrid Mode
Cloud-managed control plane with self-hosted data planes. WAF policies are centrally managed and distributed to data planes running in any environment, including air-gapped networks.
-
AI Gateway
Dedicated AI gateway capabilities including LLM proxy, token-based rate limiting, semantic caching, PII sanitization, prompt guardrails, and MCP server proxy. WAF protects AI endpoints alongside traditional APIs.
-
Declarative Configuration
Gateway and WAF configuration can be managed as code through declarative YAML/JSON, enabling GitOps workflows and CI/CD pipeline integration for security policy changes.
-
Advanced Rate Limiting
Enterprise-grade rate limiting with sliding window counters, consumer groups, and cluster-wide synchronization. Works in conjunction with WAF to prevent both application-layer attacks and abuse.
Which One Is Right for You?
The best WAF depends on your specific requirements, infrastructure, and team expertise.
CDNetworks Application Shield
- You need: Businesses with significant Asian traffic, organizations needing combined CDN and WAF, enterprises targeting China market
- You're using: Any web application, cloud-hosted sites, on-premises origins
Kong Gateway WAF
- You need: Organizations already using Kong as their API gateway, Kubernetes-native architectures needing gateway-level WAF, teams wanting unified API management and security in one platform, enterprises with microservices architectures routing all traffic through an API gateway
- You're using: Linux (Ubuntu, RHEL, Debian, Amazon Linux, Alpine), Docker, Kubernetes (via Ingress Controller and Operator), AWS, Azure, GCP, ARM64, macOS (dev)
We recommend evaluating both options with a trial or free tier before committing. Consider your existing infrastructure, team expertise, compliance requirements, and budget.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which has better support: CDNetworks Application Shield or Kong Gateway WAF?
Kong Gateway WAF has a higher support rating (4.2/5) compared to CDNetworks Application Shield (3.8/5). However, support quality can vary based on your plan tier - enterprise customers typically receive more responsive support from both providers. Consider evaluating support during a trial period.
Which is easier to implement: CDNetworks Application Shield or Kong Gateway WAF?
CDNetworks Application Shield scores higher for ease of use (3.5/5) versus Kong Gateway WAF (3.2/5). The actual implementation effort depends on your existing infrastructure and team expertise.
Which is more cost-effective: CDNetworks Application Shield or Kong Gateway WAF?
Neither provider offers a completely free tier. CDNetworks Application Shield scores higher for value (3.5/5). Total cost depends on your traffic volume, required features, and support level needs.
Which works better with AWS: CDNetworks Application Shield or Kong Gateway WAF?
Kong Gateway WAF explicitly supports AWS while CDNetworks Application Shield's AWS integration may vary. Consider whether native AWS integration or cross-cloud portability matters more for your use case.
Which is better for enterprise: CDNetworks Application Shield or Kong Gateway WAF?
Both CDNetworks Application Shield and Kong Gateway WAF are well-suited for enterprise deployments. Both offer compliance certifications important for enterprise. Enterprise buyers should evaluate SLAs, support options, and integration capabilities.