Gcore vs ModSecurity
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Gcore and ModSecurity.
Quick Verdict
3.8/5
Gcore
0 reviews
3.7/5
ModSecurity
0 reviews
Gcore is rated higher (3.8 vs 3.7). Gcore is a Luxembourg-based CDN and cloud provider with 210+ PoPs and strong coverage in CIS, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and Africa. ModSecurity is a free WAF engine that detects and blocks malicious HTTP requests. Operates as a module for major web servers to protect against OWASP Top 10 attacks and custom threats.
Gcore Global CDN with 210+ PoPs, strong CIS and emerging-market coverage | ModSecurity Open-source web application firewall for Apache, Nginx, and IIS | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.8 (0 reviews)✓ | 3.7 (0 reviews) |
| Pricing model | pay-as-you-go | free |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free |
| Best for | Applications whose audience spans CIS, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and Africa, and EU buyers wanting a Luxembourg legal base with predictable per-GB CDN pricing and a real free tier. | Sysadmins and DevOps teams running self-managed web servers who need auditable, on-premises application-layer filtering and have the capacity to tune rules. |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ✓ | |
| DDoS protection | ✓ | |
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ||
| Free tier | ||
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tierddos protectioneu datacenterus datacenterapac datacenterapi access | free tieropen sourceself hostable |
| Visit Gcore → | Visit ModSecurity → | |
Gcore
Pros
- + First 1 TB of CDN traffic free every month on the full 210+ PoP network, no card required
- + Published progressive per-GB pricing; overage rates cut ~66% versus the old Free tier
- + Strong CIS, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and Africa coverage where US rivals are thinner
- + Free SSL and basic L3/L4 DDoS included in every plan, not sold as add-ons
- + Cash-flow-positive company with reported ~$140M revenue — less pricing-risk than burn-rate challengers
Cons
- - Smaller ecosystem and fewer third-party integrations than Cloudflare
- - WAF is a separate product with a basic self-serve tier; bot and API security are Enterprise
- - Stale pricing pages and inconsistent SLA figures (99% vs 99.9%) across channels
- - Brand less known in Western markets; more support-ticket-driven buying
ModSecurity
Pros
- + Free Apache-2.0 WAF engine with 23 years of production deployments behind it
- + OWASP Core Rule Set covers OWASP Top 10 attack classes without application-specific knowledge
- + Actively maintained under OWASP governance with LTS rule branches and coordinated security releases
- + Full control and visibility: custom rules, blocking or detection-only modes, everything on your own servers
- + Broad deployment surface: Apache, nginx, IIS, containers, Debian/Ubuntu packages
Cons
- - Engine alone provides almost no protection — CRS tuning is mandatory skilled work
- - False positives are guaranteed without a detection-only tuning period; not a deploy-and-forget tool
- - libmodsecurity 3.x connector path (nginx/IIS) has matured more slowly than the Apache module
- - No volumetric DDoS protection, no managed option, no SLA, community-only support
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.