We performed a comparison between Azure Front Door and Microsoft Entra ID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Has a great application firewall and we like the security."
"The solution is good."
"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 price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"I particularly appreciate its load-balancing capabilities as it allows us to manage multiple instances and support a global presence effectively."
"I am impressed with the tool's integrations."
"You can assign as many web application firewall policies as you want to the same instance of Front Door."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"Azure Active Directory is a very simple utility to use, it has very good visibility and transparency, and an easy-to-use panel."
"The tool's most valuable feature is conditional access."
"It certainly centralizes usernames, and it certainly centralizes credentials. Companies have different tolerances for synchronizing those credentials versus redirecting to on-prem. The use case of maturing into the cloud helps from a SaaS adoption standpoint, and it also tends to be the jumping-off point for larger organizations to start doing PaaS and infrastructure as a service. So, platform as a service and infrastructure as a service kind of dovetail off the Active Directory synchronization piece and the email and SharePoint. It becomes a natural step for people, who wouldn't normally do infrastructure as a service, because they're already exposed to this, and they have already set up their email and SharePoint there. All of the components are there."
"We haven't had any problems with stability. Everything works fine."
"It has made our work easier in that it’s simplified everything for us."
"Two very important features in terms of security are governance and compliance through the Conditional Access policies and Azure Log Analytics."
"It offers features that improve our security posture such as multifactor authentication, which is the second layer of protection that is used when we log into the cloud."
"It's something we have to deal with every day. It is present. If you're in a domain environment, you'll need it to log in. If you work in a Microsoft-centric environment, you can't avoid it."
"The product needs to improve its latency."
"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."
"There's a limitation on the amount of global rules we can add."
"There is room for improvement and they're working on it."
"My suggestion for improvement would be to enhance the Data Export feature to include specific tables, particularly the Azure Diagnostics table."
"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."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"Microsoft Authenticator can improve their notifications because sometimes, my team doesn't receive notifications about app updates and authentication failures."
"The workflow management for registering new applications and users could be improved."
"Compared to what we can do on-prem, Azure AD lacks a feature for multiple hierarchical groups. For example, Group A is part of group B. Group B is part of group C. Then, if I put someone into group A, which is part of already B, they get access to any system that group B has access to, and that provisioning is automatically there."
"I would rate it an eight out of ten. The price plays a factor in the rating."
"The product needs to improve its support."
"I want to be able to identify the audiences effectively and manage them."
"The Azure AD Application Proxy, which helps you publish applications in a secure way, has room for improvement. We are moving from another solution into the Application Proxy and it's quite detailed. Depending on the role you're signing in as, you can end up at different websites, which wasn't an issue with our old solution."
"ESAE management, especially the admin tools, could be improved. It should be built in by the vendor, and I shouldn't have to add patches or updates to connect to my domain directly. It should be added by default. The price could be better."
Azure Front Door is ranked 15th in Microsoft Security Suite with 10 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 4th in Microsoft Security Suite with 190 reviews. Azure Front Door is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. 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 Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". Azure Front Door is most compared with Amazon CloudFront, Cloudflare, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai and AWS Global Accelerator, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Okta Workforce Identity. See our Azure Front Door vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
