Coraza Web Application Firewall vs StackPath Web Application Firewall
Coraza Web Application Firewall and StackPath Web Application Firewall take different approaches to web application security. Consider your team's expertise and infrastructure preferences when evaluating these options.
Coraza Web Application Firewall and StackPath Web Application Firewall 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 StackPath Web Application Firewall 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.
Edge-based WAF that was part of StackPath's CDN and edge computing platform. Discontinued in June 2024 when the company shut down operations.
Quick Comparison
| Feature | Coraza Web Application Firewall | StackPath Web Application Firewall |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Rating | 4.2/5 | 1.0/5 |
| Free Tier | Yes | No |
| Pricing Model | Free and open source (Apache 2.0) | Per site / Per bandwidth tier (discontinued) |
| Ease of Use | 3.8/5 | 1.0/5 |
| Value for Money | 4.8/5 | 1.0/5 |
| Support | 3.5/5 | 1.0/5 |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Platforms | Any platform running Go, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, macOS, Windows | Cloud (SaaS, discontinued) |
| Compliance | Supports PCI DSS compliance when configured with OWASP CRS | SOC 2, PCI DSS (historical) |
Pricing Comparison
Coraza Web Application Firewall
Model: Free and open source (Apache 2.0)
Free Tier AvailableOpen Source
Free
StackPath Web Application Firewall
Model: Per site / Per bandwidth tier (discontinued)
Edge Delivery 200
$27.50/month
Edge Delivery 2000
$275/month
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.
StackPath Web Application Firewall
-
Edge WAF
Application-layer firewall deployed at the edge, filtering traffic before it reached origin servers. Included OWASP Top 10 coverage and custom rule support.
-
DDoS Protection
Volumetric and application-layer DDoS mitigation integrated with the CDN edge network.
-
Bot Management
Bot detection and mitigation using behavioral analysis and challenge-based verification.
-
Real-time Analytics
Dashboard showing traffic patterns, blocked requests, and attack trends across protected sites.
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
StackPath Web Application Firewall
- You need: Historical reference only. StackPath is no longer available.
- You're using: Cloud (SaaS, discontinued)
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 StackPath Web Application Firewall?
Coraza Web Application Firewall offers a free tier while StackPath Web Application Firewall 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 StackPath Web Application Firewall?
Coraza Web Application Firewall has a higher support rating (3.5/5) compared to StackPath Web Application Firewall (1.0/5). 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 StackPath Web Application Firewall?
Coraza Web Application Firewall scores higher for ease of use (3.8/5) versus StackPath Web Application Firewall (1.0/5). The actual implementation effort depends on your existing infrastructure and team expertise.
Which is more cost-effective: Coraza Web Application Firewall or StackPath Web Application Firewall?
Coraza Web Application Firewall offers a free tier while StackPath Web Application Firewall 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.
What's the difference between Coraza Web Application Firewall (open source) and StackPath Web Application Firewall (commercial)?
Coraza Web Application Firewall is open source, which means you can inspect the code, customize it, and self-host without licensing fees. StackPath Web Application Firewall is a commercial solution with managed support and regular updates. Open source is ideal if you have in-house expertise and want full control. Commercial solutions are better if you prefer managed security with vendor support.