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."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."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to set up."
"What I like most about Barracuda Web Application Firewall is its availability. I also like that it's an easy-to-use solution."
"The product has fantastic support services."
"You don't need help from Barracuda to help with the deployment. The deployment is easy."
"The stability of the solution is good. I don't think we've experienced bugs, crashes, or glitches."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the simplicity of configuration."
"We run it with no downtime, because it has good support."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"I like the tool's stability and performance."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"In my experience, Microsoft products have a smooth integration and facilitate easy management and monitoring. Using Azure Application Gateway allows us to efficiently handle the system loads."
"I would like to see an improved capacity to store logs so that they will be available for a longer time."
"As most people are aware, the implementation is not easy."
"The GUI needs to be improved because it sometimes hangs and needs to be restarted."
"I would like to see a native multi-cloud cover."
"The policy updates could be improved."
"I think the main area for improvement in this product is learning it, as can be seen when comparing it to the F5 web application firewall. F5 has a very powerful learning phase when you start using your web application firewall against your site. Barracuda has something like this, but not with the same functionality from my point of view."
"One of Barracuda's limitations is its user interface. The GUI for configuration is not intuitive and has remained largely unchanged for the past 10 to 12 years."
"I have issues with the load balancing of the solution which is slow. The connection pooling in Barracuda also doesn't work. There is an issue when someone needs access to a site quickly. The issue is with HTTPS services. I am not sure if they have changed all these in the solution’s latest version."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"I believe that there is room for improvement in terms of additional functionality. It is an advantage to have features readily available for configuration without needing customer-defined rules."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
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.