We performed a comparison between Azure 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."The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"The pricing is quite good."
"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."
"The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"The management can be improved."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"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."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"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."
More Azure Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked 12th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 9 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Azure Web Application Firewall is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Azure Web Application Firewall writes "It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn". 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". Azure Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Firewall, Azure Front Door and Imperva Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Azure 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.
