IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › open-appsec · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

open-appsec

6Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

5 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. open-appsec was named 4 times in WAF, where Cloudflare led with 55%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business16 of 77

under the label threshold

Mid-market16 of 87

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In waf · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named open-appsec for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Web application firewalls	Network and edge	0%	16 of 87	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Cloudflare at 55%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for open-appsec yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated open-appsec across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“If you need advanced features and are willing to explore open-source options, open-appsec is also a strong contender.” Mistral Small · WAF · budget prompt · alternative

“Free, open-source, ML-based WAF that proactively blocks threats (famously preempted Log4Shell)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · WAF · budget prompt · alternative

“Best Next-Gen (ML-Based) Open Source WAF” Gemini 3.5 Flash · WAF · budget prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as open-appsec, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and open-appsec was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Cloudflare3 of 63Not in the top three

Cloudflare WAF3 of 62Not in the top three

AWS WAF3 of 60Not in the top three

ModSecurity3 of 60Not in the top three

BunkerWeb2 of 60Not in the top three

Sucuri2 of 60Not in the top three

Sucuri WAF2 of 60Not in the top three

Sucuri Firewall1 of 61Not in the top three

Azure WAF1 of 60Not in the top three

Check Point CloudGuard1 of 60Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named open-appsec. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 5 of the 6 answers that named open-appsec and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

openappsec.ioYour site5

geekflare.com4

wafplanet.com4

cyberpress.org3

comparitech.com2

dev.to2

github.com2

reddit.com2

sucuri.net2

acunetix.com1

Twenty-two of the twenty-seven domain citations in answers naming open-appsec came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

geekflare.com/cybersecurity/best-web-application-firewall4

openappsec.io/post/top-10-free-wafs-web-application-firewalls-for-20244

cyberpress.org/waf-solutions-by-business-size3

openappsec.io/post/best-waf-solutions-in-2024-2025-real-world-comparison3

comparitech.com/net-admin/best-web-application-firewall2

wafplanet.com/best-waf-for/free2

wafplanet.com/best-waf-for/small-business2

acunetix.com/blog/whitepapers/web-application-firewalls-do-not-replace-secure-development1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when open-appsec's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as open-appsec, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at openappsec.io is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.