We performed a comparison between Barracuda Web Application Firewall and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I find the solution very stable."
"The stability of the solution is good. I don't think we've experienced bugs, crashes, or glitches."
"The most valuable feature is the rule set."
"It's very simple and predictable, because Barracuda provides a vision of the current state of your application. It gives you an understanding of what is happening on your site and any attempts against you at your source. This is the main value that Web Application Firewall provides our company. These aspects are also the main reason for this documentation process."
"Its recommendation about the probabilities on the website is great. It also has free probability managers for the website, which is really helpful. The protection engine, signature-based protection behavior, and analysis features are also great. It also has an ATP module for sandbox scanning and behavior analysis for file uploads."
"Barracuda Web Application Firewall provides optimized performance, a user-friendly environment, helpful dashboards, and is simple to use."
"The volumetric DDoS defense is very good because I had a problem with a lot of volumetric DDoS attacks on my servers. After using Barracuda, those attacks have stopped and all the traffic is going smoothly to my servers and the system is working really well."
"Setup of this solution is straightforward. It's a stable and scalable solution, with good performance and fast technical support."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"Application Gateway automatically redirects unwanted users and takes care of the security aspect. It also handles the performance side of things, which is why we use it."
"The tool helps manage microservices by providing developers with a platform to conduct tests and assessments on the web application. The custom domain option is one of the most valuable features I've found. This feature is incredibly helpful for the end-users of the web application. With the custom domain feature, you can change the lengthy link to a shorter, more memorable one. For example, instead of using a lengthy default link, you can customize it to something like imail.com, which is much easier to remember and share."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"The documentation is lacking. It's not like what you'd get if you were using Juniper or Cisco. They need to expand on it and make it more useful."
"The solution needs to leverage some additional features to a broader scale of software-defined networks."
"If you know nothing about networks, then you can't set it up."
"It is not stable nor mature."
"I would suggest that someone implementing this product is knowledgeable in the IT field, and with the network needs. It is complex."
"It would be better if their updates would be released annually."
"While the UI is good, it can get a little bit complicated."
"They should improve their features, so they easily compare to the competition."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
"The product's performance should be better."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"The support can be improved when you are configuring the system rules. The Disaster Recovery feature can be added in the next release. The price of the solution can be reduced a bit."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 14th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster and Radware Alteon, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF and Azure Front Door. See our Barracuda Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.