Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[docs] teler-waf v1.1.7 comparison #88

Closed
dwisiswant0 opened this issue Sep 6, 2023 · 0 comments
Closed

[docs] teler-waf v1.1.7 comparison #88

dwisiswant0 opened this issue Sep 6, 2023 · 0 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@dwisiswant0
Copy link
Member

dwisiswant0 commented Sep 6, 2023

System Information
Operating System: Linux
Architecture: amd64
CPU: 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-11900H @ 2.50GHz
GOMAXPROCS: 4
teler-waf version: v1.1.7

Compilation

ms/op Mb/op allocs/op threat rules
teler WAF 21.2 44.7 114K 25828
OWASP Coraza WAF v3 66.3 68.8 694K 6

Note
teler WAF result of BenchmarkInitializeDefault, run yours with make bench-initalize command.
OWASP Coraza WAF v3 result of BenchmarkCRSCompilation.

Analyzed requests

μs/op Mb/op allocs/op
teler WAF 4.0 2.7 74
OWASP Coraza WAF v3 1425.1 312.6 6938

Note
teler WAF result of BenchmarkAnalyzeDefault, run yours with make bench-analyze command.
OWASP Coraza WAF v3 result of BenchmarkCRSSimplePOST.

reqs/s transfer/s avg. req time fastest req slowest req
teler WAF 71167 7.53MB 351.285µs 26.25µs 6.80ms
OWASP Coraza WAF v2 624 - - - -
OWASP Coraza WAF v3 892 - - - -
ModSecurity 842 - - - -

Note
teler WAF result of go-wrk -c 25 -d 10 "http://localhost:3000/path?query=value#fragments" -H "Referrer: https://teler.sh/" -H "User-Agent: X" -body "some=body".
OWASP Coraza WAF v2, v3, and ModSecurity results of Simple URLENCODED Request according to https://coraza.io/docs/reference/benchmarks/.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the benchmark results clearly indicate that teler WAF outperforms OWASP Coraza WAF v3 in terms of both compilation and request analysis. teler WAF demonstrates significantly lower values in the compilation phase, highlighting its efficiency in preparing and initializing the threat rules.

Moreover, teler WAF excels with remarkable lower values in the analysis of requests compared to OWASP Coraza WAF v3. This indicates that teler WAF is highly efficient at processing incoming requests, offering faster response times and lower memory consumption. Additionally, teler WAF maintains a substantially higher throughput with an impressive request per second rate and it operates at approx. 80x faster than OWASP Coraza WAF v3. This impressive performance can be attributed to teler WAF default behavior of caching all analyzed requests, a crucial feature for applications that demand high-speed traffic handling.

In summary, based on these benchmark results, teler WAF stands out as a high-performance web application firewall solution, providing faster compilation times and superior request handling performance when compared to OWASP Coraza WAF v3. These findings make teler WAF a compelling choice for organizations seeking enhanced security without compromising on speed and resource efficiency in their web applications.

@dwisiswant0 dwisiswant0 added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Sep 6, 2023
@kitabisa kitabisa locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 6, 2023
@dwisiswant0 dwisiswant0 pinned this issue Sep 6, 2023
@dwisiswant0 dwisiswant0 changed the title [docs] teler-waf comparison [docs] teler-waf v1.1.7 comparison Sep 6, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant