Coraza Web Application Firewall vs Kong Gateway WAF

Coraza Web Application Firewall and Kong Gateway WAF take different approaches to web application security. Consider your team's expertise and infrastructure preferences when evaluating these options.

View Coraza Web Application Firewall Review View Kong Gateway WAF Review

Coraza Web Application Firewall 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

Coraza Web Application Firewall 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.

OWASP open source WAF written in Go, fully compatible with ModSecurity rules and OWASP Core Rule Set, designed as a modern alternative to ModSecurity with native support for Caddy, Traefik, and HAProxy.

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	Coraza Web Application Firewall	Kong Gateway WAF
Overall Rating	4.2/5	3.8/5
Free Tier	Yes	No
Pricing Model	Free and open source (Apache 2.0)	Tiered (Plus per-gateway + Enterprise custom)
Ease of Use	3.8/5	3.2/5
Value for Money	4.8/5	3.0/5
Support	3.5/5	4.2/5
Open Source	Yes	No
Platforms	Any platform running Go, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, macOS, Windows	Linux (Ubuntu, RHEL, Debian, Amazon Linux, Alpine), Docker, Kubernetes (via Ingress Controller and Operator), AWS, Azure, GCP, ARM64, macOS (dev)
Compliance	Supports PCI DSS compliance when configured with OWASP CRS	SOC 2 Type II, FIPS 140-2 (Enterprise data planes), supports PCI DSS and HIPAA compliance

Pricing Comparison

Coraza Web Application Firewall

Model: Free and open source (Apache 2.0)

Free Tier Available

Open Source

Free

View full 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

View full pricing →

Features Comparison

Coraza Web Application Firewall

ModSecurity Compatibility
Full compatibility with ModSecurity SecLang rule language. Existing ModSecurity rules and rule sets work without modification.
OWASP CRS Support
Native support for the OWASP Core Rule Set, providing protection against SQL injection, XSS, RCE, and other OWASP Top 10 threats.
Go Native
Pure Go implementation with no C dependencies. Embeddable as a library, usable as middleware, or deployable as a plugin for modern proxies.
Proxy Plugins
Official plugins for Caddy (coraza-caddy), Traefik, and HAProxy allow adding WAF protection with minimal configuration.
Kubernetes Ready
Lightweight enough to run as a sidecar or embedded in ingress controllers. Works with any Go-based K8s tooling.
Audit Logging
Detailed audit logging of blocked and flagged requests for security analysis and compliance reporting.

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.

Coraza Web Application Firewall

You need: Teams migrating from ModSecurity, Kubernetes environments, Go-based applications, organizations using Caddy or Traefik, developers wanting embeddable WAF
You want to start with a free tier
You prefer open-source solutions
You're using: Any platform running Go, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, macOS, Windows

Learn more →

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)

Learn more →

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 is better for startups: Coraza Web Application Firewall or Kong Gateway WAF?

Coraza Web Application Firewall offers a free tier while Kong Gateway WAF does not, which may be important for early-stage startups. Coraza Web Application Firewall scores higher for ease of use (3.8/5), which is valuable for smaller teams. Consider your immediate security needs and growth plans when choosing.

Which has better support: Coraza Web Application Firewall or Kong Gateway WAF?

Kong Gateway WAF has a higher support rating (4.2/5) compared to Coraza Web Application Firewall (3.5/5). 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: Coraza Web Application Firewall or Kong Gateway WAF?

Coraza Web Application Firewall scores higher for ease of use (3.8/5) versus Kong Gateway WAF (3.2/5). The actual implementation effort depends on your existing infrastructure and team expertise.

Which is more cost-effective: Coraza Web Application Firewall or Kong Gateway WAF?

Coraza Web Application Firewall offers a free tier while Kong Gateway WAF requires a paid plan. Coraza Web Application Firewall scores higher for value (4.8/5). Total cost depends on your traffic volume, required features, and support level needs.

Which works better with AWS: Coraza Web Application Firewall or Kong Gateway WAF?

Kong Gateway WAF explicitly supports AWS while Coraza Web Application Firewall's AWS integration may vary. Consider whether native AWS integration or cross-cloud portability matters more for your use case.