vs bot / edge products
Edge bots ≠ account decisions
Network and CDN bot products are excellent at volumetric and automated traffic. They are usually thin on explainable account risk once a request looks human enough to pass. AbuseGraph starts where those products stop — at signup and login.
Where AbuseGraph wins
Auth-surface decisions
Score + verdict + reasons on signup/login — including email intel, session bind, and linked accounts.
You keep enforcement
Recommendations, not a forced CAPTCHA wall inside someone else's widget.
After-signup watch
Exposure monitoring for users who already passed the edge once.
Works with your edge stack
Keep edge bot filtering; call AbuseGraph when the user hits auth.
| AbuseGraph | Typical bot / edge management | |
|---|---|---|
| Layer | Application / auth API | Network edge / CDN |
| Account verdict | Yes — score + reasons | Bot score / challenge action |
| Email + graph | Included | Usually out of scope |
| Pricing shape | Per check — public plans | Often bundled with CDN |
| Best together? | Yes — edge then auth | Complementary |
When specialists still win
Volumetric / network abuse
Scrapers, credential stuffing floods, and L7 floods belong at the edge. Keep bot management there.
CDN-native blocking
If you need drop-at-edge before origin, that is a network product job — not ours.
FAQ
Should I rip out bot management for AbuseGraph?
Usually no. Keep edge bot controls for volumetric abuse; use AbuseGraph for account decisions after traffic reaches your app.
Do you block bots yourselves?
We advise. Your app (or edge) enforces. That keeps UX and policy in your control.