Sucuri WAF vs ModSecurity
Zero of fourteen models named Sucuri WAF first on the direct prompt; zero named ModSecurity. Sucuri WAF was named by eleven of the fourteen models and ModSecurity by ten and Sucuri WAF carries 17 labels and ModSecurity 20, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the web application firewalls page.
By framing
Sucuri WAFFirst choices, of fourteen modelsModSecurity
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Sucuri WAF and ModSecurity were named in the same answer twenty times, of the 72 answers naming Sucuri WAF and the 48 naming ModSecurity. In those answers ModSecurity took the first choice zero times and Sucuri WAF one.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | |||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | |||||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | |||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | | |||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | |
Sucuri WAF ModSecurity first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Sucuri WAF on the left and ModSecurity on the right.The direct prompt
Neither was named
14 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
Sucuri WAF2%#2 of 9ModSecurity0%#6 of 9Sucuri WAF4%#2 of 12ModSecurity2%#6 of 12Sucuri WAF0%#– of 9ModSecurity0%#– of 9What the models said about Sucuri WAF
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“ModSecurity (open-source, used in many like OWASP CRS, AWS WAF, Sucuri, Azure): Very common but outdated signatures make it easy to bypass” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Small B2B sites with mainly CMS‑based content (less relevant for custom APIs)” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · soft negative
“For most small businesses, Sucuri provides the best balance of protection, features, and price.” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“1. Sucuri (Best Overall for Budget)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Sucuri is highly recommended specifically for WordPress websites and small business sites” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · alternative
What the models said about ModSecurity
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Do not install this unless you are prepared to spend weeks maintaining the OWASP Core Rule Set (CRS). An unpatched open-source WAF is often less secure” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Deploying legacy self-hosted open-source WAF engines (like unmaintained ModSecurity v2/v3 builds) without active maintenance or rule updates.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid purely open-source options like ModSecurity unless you have dedicated security staff” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Top Recommendation: ModSecurity (with OWASP Core Rule Set)” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · first choice
“don't reject ModSecurity simply because it's older: its project says it is now under OWASP stewardship and actively maintained” GPT-6 Luna · negative prompt · alternative
“ModSecurity or Coraza offer powerful, free protection with complete customization” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · alternative
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.