IPFire vs Kong Gateway WAF

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

View IPFire Review View Kong Gateway WAF Review

IPFire 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

IPFire 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.

Open source Linux firewall distribution with a Netfilter packet filter, Suricata IPS, and a Squid proxy. A network perimeter firewall, not a web application firewall.

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 IPFire Kong Gateway WAF
Overall Rating 3.4/5 3.8/5
Free Tier Yes No
Pricing Model Free and open source (GPL); optional paid appliances and support from Lightning Wire Labs 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 3.2/5 4.2/5
Open Source Yes No
Platforms x86_64 bare metal, ARM (Raspberry Pi and similar), KVM, VMware, Xen, Hyper-V, cloud images Linux (Ubuntu, RHEL, Debian, Amazon Linux, Alpine), Docker, Kubernetes (via Ingress Controller and Operator), AWS, Azure, GCP, ARM64, macOS (dev)
Compliance None (open source project, no vendor certifications) SOC 2 Type II, FIPS 140-2 (Enterprise data planes), supports PCI DSS and HIPAA compliance

Pricing Comparison

IPFire

Model: Free and open source (GPL); optional paid appliances and support from Lightning Wire Labs

Free Tier Available

Community

Free

Appliance

Hardware purchase

Commercial Support

Contact Sales

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

IPFire

  • Stateful Packet Filter

    Linux Netfilter firewall with zones, NAT, port forwarding, time-based rules, MAC rules, GeoIP country blocking, and SYN-flood rate limiting.

  • Suricata IPS

    Deep packet inspection against Emerging Threats and Cisco Talos signature sets, with per-category rule selection and automatic ruleset updates.

  • Network Segmentation

    Built-in LAN, DMZ, wireless, and guest zones with separate policy, which is how you actually put a web server behind IPFire.

  • Squid Web Proxy

    Outbound proxy with transparent mode, URL filtering, MIME type blocking, traffic shaping, and LDAP, Active Directory, or RADIUS authentication.

  • VPN Gateway

    IPsec, WireGuard, and OpenVPN for site-to-site and remote access, with hardware crypto acceleration and post-quantum key exchange on IPsec.

  • Pakfire Add-ons

    Package manager for optional components including monitoring, backup tools, Guardian for log-driven blocking, and Tor.

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.

IPFire

  • You need: Home labs, small offices, and branch networks needing a free perimeter firewall, VPN gateway, and IPS on modest hardware
  • You want to start with a free tier
  • You prefer open-source solutions
  • You're using: x86_64 bare metal, ARM (Raspberry Pi and similar), KVM, VMware, Xen, Hyper-V, cloud images
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: IPFire or Kong Gateway WAF?

IPFire offers a free tier while Kong Gateway WAF does not, which may be important for early-stage startups. IPFire 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: IPFire or Kong Gateway WAF?

Kong Gateway WAF has a higher support rating (4.2/5) compared to IPFire (3.2/5). 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: IPFire or Kong Gateway WAF?

IPFire 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: IPFire or Kong Gateway WAF?

IPFire offers a free tier while Kong Gateway WAF requires a paid plan. IPFire 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: IPFire or Kong Gateway WAF?

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