We performed a comparison between Azure Front Door and Radware Alteon 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."It inspects the traffic at the network level before it comes into Azure. We can do SSL offloading, and it can detect abnormalities before the traffic comes into the application. It can be used globally and is easy to set up. It is also quite stable and scalable."
"Has a great application firewall and we like the security."
"I particularly appreciate its load-balancing capabilities as it allows us to manage multiple instances and support a global presence effectively."
"The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"The solution is good."
"The price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"The web application firewall is a great feature."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of Radware Alteon are the reverse proxy functionality and the SSL offload and hardware."
"With Alteon, the load-balancing options are practically unlimited. We haven't had any issues with offloading, decryption, putting in cookies, or any other load-balancing features. We can check URLs, etc., on the back end for load balancing instead of running a TCP check. We're also doing some certificate stuff on there. Alteon covers all of the standard load-balancing techniques, and we employ most of them daily."
"It is easy to expand. Our clients are enterprise-size."
"The link load balancing is a great feature."
"The features that mitigate attacks are very valuable."
"The product offers high availability."
"I found the link load balancer and server load balancer are the most valuable."
"Radware has been characterized by being extremely robust. This gives us the confidence to offer our users a continuous service."
"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"My suggestion for improvement would be to enhance the Data Export feature to include specific tables, particularly the Azure Diagnostics table."
"There is room for improvement and they're working on it."
"I'm responsible for the governance and cost control of Azure. I'm not a specialist in any products and therefore I couldn't really speak effectively to features that are lacking or missing."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"The product's features are limited compared to Cloudflare. The tool also doesn't work well in a hybrid environment. I would like to see a way to add personalized APIs in the system."
"We should be able to use Front Door defenders with multiple cloud vendors. Currently, they can be used only with the Azure cloud. Azure Front Door should also be able to do global load balancing and provide internal front door services. Microsoft should clearly define what Traffic Manager, Application Gateway, and Azure Front Door products do. These are similar products, and people get confused between these products."
"There's a limitation on the amount of global rules we can add."
"I would like this solution to have an integration tool that will convert configuration from other software, into readable values for this product during implementation."
"We are having a difficult time with the security module, and how to implement the Radware security."
"We are in the process of updating our version of the solution, so judging what should be improved is difficult. But in some cases, the visualization takes a while, especially for mapping issues."
"We don't integrate anything with it because most things don't integrate with Radware. If it were F5, we could integrate it. We can integrate F5 with practically anything that integrates with a load balancer, but that's not the case with Alteon."
"The user interface can be improved."
"I would like to see future enhancements in security, specifically in threat protection."
"Support is very important because if we get good support, we'll be able to sell and supply more numbers."
"Radware Alteon could improve the troubleshooting from the command line interface, they could do a better job making it easier."
Azure Front Door is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 10th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 33 reviews. Azure Front Door is rated 8.8, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Front Door writes " An easy -to-setup stable solution that enables implementing resources globally and has a good technical support team". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". Azure Front Door is most compared with Amazon CloudFront, Cloudflare, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai and AWS Global Accelerator, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and F5 Advanced WAF. See our Azure Front Door vs. Radware Alteon 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.