We performed a comparison between Airlock and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."
"The pricing is quite good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"The solution has built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The tool must be simplified."
"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"Microsoft needs to work on their documentation."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"It takes a lot of time for a certificate to update in the system. That is a huge drawback, affecting the load-balancing side. And when there are changes to the load balancing, it affects the end-user."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Airlock is ranked 22nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 41 reviews. Airlock is rated 10.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Airlock writes "Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world". 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". Airlock is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Human Defense Platform and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Citrix NetScaler, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Azure Front Door.
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.
